Associations between patient safety culture and workplace safety culture in hospital settings.

BACKGROUND: Strong cultures of workplace safety and patient safety are both critical for advancing safety in healthcare and eliminating harm to both the healthcare workforce and patients. However, there is currently minimal published empirical evidence about the relationship between the perceptions of providers and staff on workplace safety culture and patient safety culture. METHODS: This study examined cross-sectional relationships between the core Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Hospital Survey 2.0 patient safety culture measures and supplemental workplace safety culture measures. We used data from a pilot test in 2021 of the Workplace Safety Supplemental Item Set, which consisted of 6,684 respondents from 28 hospitals in 16 states. We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between the 11 patient safety culture measures and the 10 workplace safety culture measures. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (69) of 110 associations were statistically significant (mean standardized ß = 0.5; 0.58 < standardized ß < 0.95). The largest number of associations for the workplace safety culture measures with the patient safety culture measures were: (1) overall support from hospital leaders to ensure workplace safety; (2) being able to report workplace safety problems without negative consequences; and, (3) overall rating on workplace safety. The two associations with the strongest magnitude were between the overall rating on workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.95) and hospital management support for workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Study results provide evidence that workplace safety culture and patient safety culture are fundamentally linked and both are vital to a strong and healthy culture of safety.

A Systematic Review of Strategies to Enhance Response Rates and Representativeness of Patient Experience Surveys.

BACKGROUND: Data from surveys of patient care experiences are a cornerstone of public reporting and pay-for-performance initiatives. Recently, increasing concerns have been raised about survey response rates and how to promote equity by ensuring that responses represent the perspectives of all patients. OBJECTIVE: Review evidence on survey administration strategies to improve response rates and representativeness of patient surveys. RESEARCH DESIGN: Systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. STUDY SELECTION: Forty peer-reviewed randomized experiments of administration protocols for patient experience surveys. RESULTS: Mail administration with telephone follow-up provides a median response rate benefit of 13% compared with mail-only or telephone-only. While surveys administered only by web typically result in lower response rates than those administered by mail or telephone (median difference in response rate: -21%, range: -44%, 0%), the limited evidence for a sequential web-mail-telephone mode suggests a potential response rate benefit over sequential mail-telephone (median: 4%, range: 2%, 5%). Telephone-only and sequential mixed modes including telephone may yield better representation across patient subgroups by age, insurance type, and race/ethnicity. Monetary incentives are associated with large increases in response rates (median increase: 12%, range: 7%, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: Sequential mixed-mode administration yields higher patient survey response rates than a single mode. Including telephone in sequential mixed-mode administration improves response among those with historically lower response rates; including web in mixed-mode administration may increase response at lower cost. Other promising strategies to improve response rates include in-person survey administration during hospital discharge, incentives, minimizing survey language complexity, and prenotification before survey administration.

Development, Pilot Study, and Psychometric Analysis of the AHRQ Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Workplace Safety Supplemental Items for Hospitals.

Workplace safety is critical for advancing patient safety and eliminating harm to both the healthcare workforce and patients. The purpose of this study was to develop and test survey items that can be used in conjunction with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Hospital Survey to assess how the organizational culture in hospitals supports workplace safety for providers and staff. After conducting a literature review and background interviews with workplace safety experts, we identified key areas of workplace safety culture (workplace hazards, moving/transferring/lifting patients, workplace aggression, supervisor/management support for workplace safety, workplace safety reporting, and work stress/burnout) and drafted survey items to assess these areas. Survey items were cognitively tested and pilot tested with the SOPS Hospital Survey 2.0 among providers and staff in 28 U.S. hospitals. We conducted psychometric analysis on data from 6684 respondents. Confirmatory factor analysis results (item factor loadings and model fit indices), internal consistency reliability, and site-level reliability were acceptable for the 16 survey items grouped into 6 composite measures. Most composite measures were significantly correlated with each other and with the overall rating on workplace safety, demonstrating conceptual convergence among survey measures. Hospitals and researchers can use the Workplace Safety Supplemental items to assess the dimensions of organizational culture that support provider and staff safety and to identify both strengths and areas for improvement.

Development and pilot testing of survey items to assess the culture of value and efficiency in hospitals and medical offices.

BACKGROUND: Given rising costs and changing payment models, healthcare organisations are increasingly focused on value and efficiency. The goal of our study was to develop survey items to assess clinician and staff perspectives about the extent to which the organisational culture in hospitals and medical offices supports value and efficiency. METHODS: Development began with a literature review and interviews with experts and clinicians and staff from hospitals and medical offices. We identified key areas of value and efficiency culture, drafted survey items and conducted cognitive testing. Using purposive sampling to select sites, the 36-item surveys were pilot tested in 47 hospitals and 96 medical offices. Psychometric analysis was conducted on data from 3951 hospital respondents (42% response) and 1458 medical office respondents (63% response). RESULTS: Factor loadings, multilevel confirmatory factor analysis model fit and reliability estimates were acceptable for the 13 items grouped into 4 composite measures: Empowerment to Improve Efficiency (3 items), Efficiency and Waste Reduction (3 items), Patient Centeredness and Efficiency (3 items) and Management Support for Improving Efficiency and Reducing Waste (4 items). All composite measures were significantly intercorrelated and related to the four Overall Ratings of Healthcare Quality, indicating adequate conceptual convergence among the measures. Eight items assessing Experiences With Activities to Improve Efficiency were also included. CONCLUSION: We developed psychometrically sound survey items measuring value and efficiency culture. When added to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Surveys on Patient Safety Culture, the item sets extend those surveys by assessing additional dimensions of organisational culture that affect care delivery. Healthcare organisations can use these item sets to assess how well their organisational culture supports value and efficiency and identify areas for improvement.

Effects of Different Transitional Care Strategies on Outcomes after Hospital Discharge-Trust Matters, Too.

BACKGROUND: As health systems shift toward value-based care, strategies to reduce readmissions and improve patient outcomes become increasingly important. Despite extensive research, the combinations of transitional care (TC) strategies associated with best patient-centered outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: Using an observational, prospective cohort study design, Project ACHIEVE sought to determine the association of different combinations of TC strategies with patient-reported and postdischarge health care utilization outcomes. Using purposive sampling, the research team recruited a diverse sample of short-term acute care and critical access hospitals in the United States (N = 42) and analyzed data on eligible Medicare beneficiaries (N = 7,939) discharged from their medical/surgical units. Using both hospital- and patient-reported TC strategy exposure data, the project compared patients "exposed" to each of five overlapping groups of TC strategies to their "control" counterparts. Primary outcomes included 30-day hospital readmissions, 7-day postdischarge emergency department (ED) visits and patient-reported physical and mental health, pain, and participation in daily activities. RESULTS: Participants averaged 72.3 years old (standard deviation =10.1), 53.4% were female, and most were White (78.9%). Patients exposed to one TC group (Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination) were less likely to have 30-day readmissions (risk ratio [RR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57-0.92, p < 0.001) or 7-day ED visits (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93, p < 0.001) and more likely to report excellent physical and mental health, greater participation in daily activities, and less pain (RR ranged from 1.11 to 1.15, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In concert with care coordination activities that bridge the transition from hospital to home, hospitals' clear communication and fostering of trust with patients were associated with better patient-reported outcomes and reduced health care utilization.

Linking Patient Safety Culture to Quality Ratings in the Nursing Home Setting.

There is limited evidence on the associations between patient safety culture and measures of health care quality in nursing homes. This study examines the relationship between scores on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Nursing Home Survey (NH SOPS) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Ratings. Using data from 186 nursing homes, we conducted multiple regression analyses predicting the Five-Star Quality Ratings from the NH SOPS survey measures. Five NH SOPS measures were related to the Overall, Health Inspections, and Quality Five-Star Ratings. Four NH SOPS measures were related to at least two of the four Five-Star Quality Ratings and three SOPS measures were related to one Five-Star Rating. None of the NH SOPS measures were significantly associated with the Staffing Five-Star Rating. Findings generally indicated that stronger patient safety culture is associated with higher quality ratings.

Development and psychometric properties of surveys to assess patient and family caregiver experience with care transitions.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to develop and administer surveys that assess patient and family caregiver experiences with care transitions and examine the psychometric properties of the surveys. The surveys were designed to ask about 1) the transitional care services that matter most to patients and their caregivers and 2) care outcomes, including the overall quality of transitional care they received, patient self-reported health, and caregiver effort/stress. METHODS: Survey items were developed based on a review of the literature, existing surveys, focus groups, site visits, stakeholder and expert input, and patient and caregiver cognitive interviews. We administered mail surveys with telephone follow up to patients recently discharged from 43 U.S. hospitals. Patients identified the caregivers who helped them during their hospital stay (Time 1 caregiver) and when they were home (Time 2 caregiver). Time 1 and Time 2 caregivers were surveyed by telephone only. The psychometric properties of the survey items and outcome composite measures were examined for each of the three surveys. Items that performed poorly across multiple analyses, including those with low variability and/or a high missing data, were dropped except when they were conceptually important. RESULTS: The analysis datasets included responses from 9282 patients, 1245 Time 1 caregivers and 1749 Time 2 caregivers. The construct validity of the three proposed outcome composite measures-Overall Quality of Transitional Care (patient and caregiver surveys), Patient Overall Health (patient survey) and Caregiver Effort/Stress (caregiver surveys) -was supported by acceptable exploratory factor analysis results and acceptable internal consistency reliability. Site-level reliability was acceptable for the two patient outcome composite measures, but was low for Caregiver Effort/Stress (< 0.70). In all surveys, the Overall Quality of Transitional Care outcome composite measure was significantly correlated with other outcome composite measures and most of the single-item measures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the final patient and caregiver surveys are psychometrically sound and can be used by health systems, hospitals, and researchers to assess the quality of care transitions and related outcomes. Results from these surveys can be used to improve care transitions, focusing on what matters most to patients and their family caregivers.

Development and psychometric properties of surveys to assess provider perspectives on the barriers and facilitators of effective care transitions.

BACKGROUND: The quality of the discharge process and effective care transitions between settings of care are critical to minimize gaps in patient care and reduce hospital readmissions. Few studies have explored which care transition components and strategies are most valuable to patients and providers. This study describes the development, pilot testing, and psychometric analysis of surveys designed to gain providers' perspectives on current practices in delivering transitional care services. METHODS: We underwent a comprehensive process to develop items measuring unique aspects of care transitions from the perspectives of the three types of providers (downstream, ambulatory, and hospital providers). The process involved 1) an environmental scan, 2) provider interviews, 3) survey cognitive testing, 4) pilot testing, 5) a Stakeholder Advisory Group, 6) a Scientific Advisory Council, and 7) a collaborative Project ACHIEVE (Achieving Patient-Centered Care and Optimized Health in Care Transitions by Evaluating the Value of Evidence) research team. Three surveys were developed and fielded to providers affiliated with 43 hospitals participating in Project ACHIEVE. Web-based survey administration resulted in 948 provider respondents. We assessed response variability and response missingness. To evaluate the composites' psychometric properties, we examined intercorrelations of survey items, item factor loadings, model fit indices, internal consistency reliability, and intercorrelations between the composite measures and overall rating items. RESULTS: Results from psychometric analyses of the three surveys provided support for five composite measures: 1) Effort in Coordinating Patient Care, 2) Quality of Patient Information Received, 3) Organizational Support for Transitional Care, 4) Access to Community Resources, and 5) Strength of Relationships Among Community Providers. All factor loadings and reliability estimates were acceptable (loadings ≥ 0.40, α ≥ 0.70), and the fit indices showed a good model fit. All composite measures positively and significantly correlated with the overall ratings (0.13 ≤ r ≤ 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: We determined that the items and composite measures assessing the barriers and facilitators to care transitions within this survey are reliable and demonstrate satisfactory psychometric properties. The instruments may be useful to healthcare organizations and researchers to assess the quality of care transitions and target areas of improvement across different provider settings.

Improving evidence-based grouping of transitional care strategies in hospital implementation using statistical tools and expert review.

BACKGROUND: As health systems transition to value-based care, improving transitional care (TC) remains a priority. Hospitals implementing evidence-based TC models often adapt them to local contexts. However, limited research has evaluated which groups of TC strategies, or transitional care activities, commonly implemented by hospitals correspond with improved patient outcomes. In order to identify TC strategy groups for evaluation, we applied a data-driven approach informed by literature review and expert opinion. METHODS: Based on a review of evidence-based TC models and the literature, focus groups with patients and family caregivers identifying what matters most to them during care transitions, and expert review, the Project ACHIEVE team identified 22 TC strategies to evaluate. Patient exposure to TC strategies was measured through a hospital survey (N = 42) and prospective survey of patients discharged from those hospitals (N = 8080). To define groups of TC strategies for evaluation, we performed a multistep process including: using ACHIEVE'S prior retrospective analysis; performing exploratory factor analysis, latent class analysis, and finite mixture model analysis on hospital and patient survey data; and confirming results through expert review. Machine learning (e.g., random forest) was performed using patient claims data to explore the predictive influence of individual strategies, strategy groups, and key covariates on 30-day hospital readmissions. RESULTS: The methodological approach identified five groups of TC strategies that were commonly delivered as a bundle by hospitals: 1) Patient Communication and Care Management, 2) Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination, 3) Home-Based Trust, Plain language, and Coordination, 4) Patient/Family Caregiver Assessment and Information Exchange Among Providers, and 5) Assessment and Teach Back. Each TC strategy group comprises three to six, non-mutually exclusive TC strategies (i.e., some strategies are in multiple TC strategy groups). Results from random forest analyses revealed that TC strategies patients reported receiving were more important in predicting readmissions than TC strategies that hospitals reported delivering, and that other key co-variates, such as patient comorbidities, were the most important variables. CONCLUSION: Sophisticated statistical tools can help identify underlying patterns of hospitals' TC efforts. Using such tools, this study identified five groups of TC strategies that have potential to improve patient outcomes.

Exploring relationships between hospital patient safety culture and Consumer Reports safety scores.

BACKGROUND: A number of private and public companies calculate and publish proprietary hospital patient safety scores based on publicly available quality measures initially reported by the U.S. federal government. This study examines whether patient safety culture perceptions of U.S. hospital staff in a large national survey are related to publicly reported patient safety ratings of hospitals. METHODS: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (Hospital SOPS) assesses provider and staff perceptions of hospital patient safety culture. Consumer Reports (CR), a U.S. based non-profit organization, calculates and shares with its subscribers a Hospital Safety Score calculated annually from patient experience survey data and outcomes data gathered from federal databases. Linking data collected during similar time periods, we analyzed relationships between staff perceptions of patient safety culture composites and the CR Hospital Safety Score and its five components using multiple multivariate linear regressions. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 164 hospitals, with patient safety culture survey responses from 140,316 providers and staff, with an average of 856 completed surveys per hospital and an average response rate per hospital of 56%. Higher overall Hospital SOPS composite average scores were significantly associated with higher overall CR Hospital Safety Scores (ß = 0.24, p < 0.05). For 10 of the 12 Hospital SOPS composites, higher patient safety culture scores were associated with higher CR patient experience scores on communication about medications and discharge. CONCLUSION: This study found a relationship between hospital staff perceptions of patient safety culture and the Consumer Reports Hospital Safety Score, which is a composite of patient experience and outcomes data from federal databases. As hospital managers allocate resources to improve patient safety culture within their organizations, their efforts may also indirectly improve consumer-focused, publicly reported hospital rating scores like the Consumer Reports Hospital Safety Score.

Differing perceptions of safety culture across job roles in the ambulatory setting: analysis of the AHRQ Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture.

BACKGROUND: Experts in patient safety stress the importance of a shared culture of safety. Lack of consensus may be detrimental to patient safety. This study examines differences in patient safety culture perceptions among providers, management and staff in a large national survey of safety culture in ambulatory practices in the USA. METHODS: The US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture (SOPS) assesses perceptions about patient safety issues and event reporting in medical offices (ie, ambulatory practices). Using the 2014 data, we analysed responses from medical offices with at least five respondents. We calculated differences in perceptions of patient safety culture across six job positions (physicians, management, nurse practitioners (NPs)/physician assistants (PAs), nurses, clinical support staff and administrative/clerical staff) for 10 survey composites, the average of the 10 composites and an overall patient safety rating using multivariate hierarchical linear regressions. RESULTS: We analysed data from 828 medical offices with responses from 15 523 providers and staff, with an average 20 completed surveys per medical office (range: 5-367) and an average medical office response rate of 65% (range: 3%-100%). Management had significantly more positive patient safety culture perceptions on nine of 10 composite scores compared with all other job positions, including physicians. The composite that showed the largest difference was Communication Openness; Management (85% positive) was 22% points more positive than other clinical and support staff and administrative/clerical staff. Physicians were significantly more positive than PAs/NPs, nursing staff, other clinical and support staff and administrative/clerical staff on four composites: Communication About Error, Communication Openness, Staff Training and Teamwork, ranging from 3% to 20% points more positive. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that managers need to pay attention to the training needs of office staff, since this was an area with one of the greatest gaps in perceptions. In addition, both office managers and physicians need to encourage more open communication. As medical offices innovate to improve value, efficiency and patient-centred care, it is important that they continue to foster shared perceptions about what organisational members need, understanding that those perceptions may differ systematically by job position.

Exploring relationships between patient safety culture and patients' assessments of hospital care.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine relationships among 2 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality measures of hospital patient safety and quality, which reflect different perspectives on hospital performance: the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (Hospital SOPS)--a hospital employee patient safety culture survey--and the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Hospital Survey (CAHPS Hospital Survey)--a survey of the experiences of adult inpatients with hospital care and services. Our hypothesis was that these 2 measures would be positively related. METHODS: We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between the Hospital SOPS measures and CAHPS Hospital Survey measures, controlling for hospital bed size and ownership. Analyses were conducted at the hospital level with each survey's measures using data from 73 hospitals that administered both surveys during similar periods. RESULTS: Higher overall Hospital SOPS composite average scores were associated with higher overall CAHPS Hospital Survey composite average scores (r = 0.41, P G 0.01). Twelve of 15 Hospital SOPS measures were positively related to the CAHPS Hospital Survey composite average score after controlling for bed size and ownership, with significant standardized regression coefficients ranging from 0.25 to 0.38. None of the Hospital SOPS measures were significantly correlated with either of the two single-item CAHPS Hospital Survey measures (hospital rating and willingness to recommend). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that hospitals where staff have more positive perceptions of patient safety culture tend to have more positive assessments of care from patients. This finding helps validate both surveys and suggests that improvements in patient safety culture may lead to improved patient experience with care. Further research is needed to determine the generalizability of these results to larger sets of hospitals, to hospital units, and to other settings of care.

Psychometric properties of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Adult Visit Survey.

BACKGROUND: The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Adult Visit Survey enables patients to report their experiences with outpatient medical offices. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the factor structure and reliability of the CAHPS Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) Adult Visit Survey. DATA SOURCE: Data from 21,318 patients receiving care in 450 clinical practice sites collected from March 2010 to December 2010 were analyzed from the CG-CAHPS Database. RESEARCH DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual level and multilevel confirmatory factor analyses were used to examine CAHPS survey responses at the patient and practice site levels. We also estimated internal consistency reliability and practice site level reliability. Correlations among multi-item composites and correlations between the composites and 2 global rating items were examined. MEASURES: Scores on CG-CAHPS composites assessing Access to Care, Doctor Communication, Courteous/Helpful Staff, and 2 global ratings of whether one would Recommend their Doctor, and an Overall Doctor Rating. RESULTS: Analyses provide support for the hypothesized 3-factor model assessing Access to Care, Doctor Communication, and Courteous/Helpful Staff. In addition, the internal consistency reliabilities were ≥ 0.77 and practice site level reliabilities for sites with >4 clinicians were ≥ 0.75. All composites were positively and significantly correlated with the 2 global rating items, with Doctor Communication having the strongest relationship with the global ratings. CONCLUSIONS: The CG-CAHPS Adult Visit Survey has acceptable psychometric properties at the individual level and practice site level. The analyses suggest that the survey items are measuring their intended concepts and yield reliable information.

Exploring relationships between patient safety culture and patients' assessments of hospital care.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine relationships among 2 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality measures of hospital patient safety and quality, which reflect different perspectives on hospital performance: the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (Hospital SOPS)-a hospital employee patient safety culture survey-and the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Hospital Survey (CAHPS Hospital Survey)-a survey of the experiences of adult inpatients with hospital care and services. Our hypothesis was that these 2 measures would be positively related. METHODS: We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between the Hospital SOPS measures and CAHPS Hospital Survey measures, controlling for hospital bed size and ownership. Analyses were conducted at the hospital level with each survey's measures using data from 73 hospitals that administered both surveys during similar periods. RESULTS: Higher overall Hospital SOPS composite average scores were associated with higher overall CAHPS Hospital Survey composite average scores (r = 0.41, P < 0.01). Twelve of 15 Hospital SOPS measures were positively related to the CAHPS Hospital Survey composite average score after controlling for bed size and ownership, with significant standardized regression coefficients ranging from 0.25 to 0.38. None of the Hospital SOPS measures were significantly correlated with either of the two single-item CAHPS Hospital Survey measures (hospital rating and willingness to recommend). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that hospitals where staff have more positive perceptions of patient safety culture tend to have more positive assessments of care from patients. This finding helps validate both surveys and suggests that improvements in patient safety culture may lead to improved patient experience with care. Further research is needed to determine the generalizability of these results to larger sets of hospitals, to hospital units, and to other settings of care.

Exploring relationships between hospital patient safety culture and adverse events.

OBJECTIVES: There has been very limited research linking staff perceptions of hospital patient safety culture with rates of adverse clinical events. This exploratory study examined relationships between the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Hospital Survey of Patient Safety Culture and rates of in-hospital complications and adverse events as measured by the AHRQ Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs). The general hypothesis was that hospitals with a more positive patient safety culture would have lower PSI rates. METHODS: We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between 15 patient safety culture variables and a composite measure of adverse clinical events based on 8 risk-adjusted PSIs from 179 hospitals, controlling for hospital bed size and ownership. All patient safety culture data were collected in 2005 and 2006 (except 1 late 2004 hospital), and all PSI data were collected in 2005. RESULTS: Nearly all of the relationships tested were in the expected direction (negative), and 7 (47%) of the 15 relationships were statistically significant. All significant relationships were of moderate size, with standardized regression coefficients ranging from -0.15 to -0.41, indicating that hospitals with a more positive patient safety culture scores had lower rates of in-hospital complications or adverse events as measured by PSIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the idea that a more positive patient safety culture is associated with fewer adverse events in hospitals. Further research is needed to determine the generalizability of these results to larger sets of hospitals and to examine the causal relationship between patient safety culture and clinical patient outcomes.

Multilevel psychometric properties of the AHRQ hospital survey on patient safety culture.

BACKGROUND: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture was designed to assess staff views on patient safety culture in hospital settings. The purpose of this study was to examine the multilevel psychometric properties of the survey. METHODS: Survey data from 331 U.S. hospitals with 2,267 hospital units and 50,513 respondents were analyzed to examine the psychometric properties of the survey's items and composites. Item factor loadings, intraclass correlations (ICCs), design effects, internal consistency reliabilities, and multilevel confirmatory factor analyses (MCFA) were examined as well as intercorrelations among the survey's composites. RESULTS: Psychometric analyses confirmed the multilevel nature of the data at the individual, unit and hospital levels of analysis. Results provided overall evidence supporting the 12 dimensions and 42 items included in the AHRQ Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture as having acceptable psychometric properties at all levels of analysis, with a few exceptions. The Staffing composite fell slightly below cutoffs in a number of areas, but is conceptually important given its impact on patient safety. In addition, one hospital-level model fit indicator for the Supervisor/Manager Expectations & Actions Promoting Patient Safety composite was low (CFI = .82), but all other psychometrics for this scale were good. Average dimension intercorrelations were moderate at .42 at the individual level, .50 at the unit level, and .56 at the hospital level. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analyses conducted on a very large database of hospitals provided overall support for the patient safety culture dimensions and items included in the AHRQ Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture. The survey's items and dimensions overall are psychometrically sound at the individual, unit, and hospital levels of analysis and can be used by researchers and hospitals interested in assessing patient safety culture. Further research is needed to study the criterion-related validity of the survey by analysing the relationship between patient safety culture and patient outcomes and studying how to improve patient safety culture.

Staff attitudes about event reporting and patient safety culture in hospital transfusion services.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how transfusion service staff view issues pertaining to event reporting and patient safety. The goal of this study was to assess transfusion service staff attitudes about these issues. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A survey was developed and administered to 945 transfusion service staff from 43 hospital transfusion services in the United States and 10 in Canada. The overall response rate was 73 percent (693 responses), with a mean of 15 respondents per site. RESULTS: While events resulting in patient harm are reported (91%) as well as mistakes not corrected that could cause harm (79%), less than one-third of respondents report deviations from procedures with no apparent potential to harm (31%) and mistakes that staff catch and correct on their own (27%). Staff indicated that the main reasons mistakes happen are interruptions (51%) and staff in other departments not knowing or understanding proper procedures (49%). Staff had overall positive attitudes about event reporting, but a significant minority were afraid of punitive consequences. Most were positive about their supervisor's safety actions and believed that their transfusion service tries to identify causes of mistakes. Only 31 percent, however, agreed that nursing staff would work with the transfusion service to reduce mistakes. CONCLUSION: Overall, the transfusion services had very positive attitudes about event reporting and safety culture. Transfusion services do well recording events that result in patient harm or have the potential for harm, but there is a need to increase reporting of deviations from procedures and mistakes that staff catch and correct on their own. In addition, there are a few areas of safety culture that warrant improvement, particularly the transfusion service's work relationship with nursing staff. The study provides useful descriptive information about how staff view event reporting and safety-related issues and identifies strengths and areas for improvement.