Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30477111›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

Assessment of Patient and Occupational Safety Culture in Hospitals: Development of a Questionnaire with Comparable Dimensions and Results of a Feasibility Study in a German University Hospital.

Anke Wagner, Martina Michaelis, Edwin Luntz, Andrea Wittich, Matthias Schrappe, Constanze Lessing, Monika A Rieger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Emerging Issues in Occupational Safety and Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anke WagnerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany. anke.wagner@med.uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-5053-1753
Martina MichaelisInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany. martina.michaelis@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Edwin LuntzInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany. Edwin.Luntz@uniklinikum-dresden.de.
Andrea WittichDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Hauptstraße 8, 79104 Freiburg, Germany. a_wittich@web.de.
Matthias SchrappeCologne Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, University Hospital Cologne (AöR), Gleueler Straße 176, 50935 Köln, Germany. matthias@schrappe.com.
Constanze LessingInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Straße 25, 53127 Bonn, Germany. lessing.c@gmx.de.
Monika A RiegerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany. monika.rieger@med.uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-7855-3663
University of Tübingen · DEResearch Centre for Applied System Safety and Industrial Medicine · DEUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: Both patient and occupational safety cultures should be considered when promoting safety culture. To our knowledge, there are no studies that capture patient safety culture (PSC) and occupational safety culture (OSC) in hospitals while using a common questionnaire. The aim of this feasibility study in a German university hospital was to develop a questionnaire to assess both issues analogously. In addition to feasibility outcomes, we report results of PSC-OSC comparisons. (2) Methods: To assess PSC, we used the existing Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSPSC) questionnaire. Developing new OSC "twin items" for certain parts of the HSPSC was supported by a previous literature review. Additionally, we developed multiple choice questions to examine knowledge and competencies regarding specific PS/OS aspects. (3) Results: Developing and implementing a combined PSC and OSC assessment instrument was feasible. The overall response rate was 33% (407 nurses, 140 physicians). In general, the statistical reliability of almost all scales was sufficient. Positive PSC perceptions (agreement rates 46⁻87%) were found in 16 out of 18 scales. Of the four twin scales, the PSC values were significantly better. Individual PS- and OS-related knowledge and competencies were lower than expected. (4) Conclusion: The comparative investigation of patient and occupational safety in a large hospital is a promising approach and can be recommended for further studies. We used our experiences that are presented here in an ongoing bicentric study on the associations between working conditions, occupational safety culture, patient safety culture, and patient safety outcomes (WorkSafeMed).

Indexed as

Occupational HealthOrganizational CulturePatient SafetySafety ManagementSurveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleGermanyHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesPhysiciansfeasibility studyhealth care workershospitalinstrument developmentoccupational safety culturepatient safety culturesurvey

Identifiers

PMID30477111
PMCPMC6313355
OpenAlexW2901090395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.