Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30665401›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Healthcare professionals' perspectives on working conditions, leadership, and safety climate: a cross-sectional study.

Anke Wagner, Monika A Rieger, Tanja Manser, Heidrun Sturm, Juliane Hardt, Peter Martus, Constanze Lessing, Antje Hammer, WorkSafeMed Consortium

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

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 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5053-1753
Monika A RiegerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074, Tübingen, Germany.
Tanja ManserUniversity of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, FHNW School of Applied Psychology, Riggenbachstrasse 16, 4600, Olten, Switzerland.
Heidrun SturmInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074, Tübingen, Germany.
Juliane HardtInstitute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University Hospital of Tübingen, Silcherstraße 5, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Peter MartusInstitute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University Hospital of Tübingen, Silcherstraße 5, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Constanze Lessingindpendent consultant, Berlin, Germany.
Antje HammerInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
WorkSafeMed Consortium

Funding

Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen IN-1148721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPromoting patient and occupational safety are two key challenges for hospitals. When aiming to improve these two outcomes synergistically, psychosocial working conditions, leadership by hospital management and supervisors, and perceptions of patient and occupational safety climate have to be considered. Recent studies have shown that these key topics are interrelated and form a critical foundation for promoting patient and occupational safety in hospitals. So far, these topics have mainly been studied independently from each other. The present study investigated hospital staffs' perceptions of four different topics: (1) psychosocial working conditions, (2) leadership, (3) patient safety climate, and (4) occupational safety climate. We present results from a survey in two German university hospitals aiming to detect differences between nurses and physicians.

methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study using a standardized paper-based questionnaire. The survey was conducted with nurses and physicians to assess the four topics. The instruments mainly consisted of scales of the German version of the COPSOQ (Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire), one scale of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), scales to assess leadership and transformational leadership, scales to assess patient safety climate using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSPSC), and analogous items to assess occupational safety climate.

resultsA total of 995 completed questionnaires out of 2512 distributed questionnaires were returned anonymously. The overall response rate was 39.6%. The sample consisted of 381 physicians and 567 nurses. We found various differences with regard to the four topics. In most of the COPSOQ and the HSPSC-scales, physicians rated psychosocial working conditions and patient safety climate more positively than nurses. With regard to occupational safety, nurses indicated higher occupational risks than physicians.

conclusionsThe WorkSafeMed study combined the assessment of the four topics psychosocial working conditions, leadership, patient safety climate, and occupational safety climate in hospitals. Looking at the four topics provides an overview of where improvements in hospitals may be needed for nurses and physicians. Based on these results, improvements in working conditions, patient safety climate, and occupational safety climate are required for health care professionals in German university hospitals - especially for nurses.

Indexed as

LeadershipPatient SafetySafety ManagementAdultAgedBurnout, ProfessionalCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultHospitalLeadershipOccupational safety climatePatient safety climateTransformational leadershipWorking conditions

Identifiers

PMID30665401
PMCPMC6341698

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.