Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31883512›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Patient safety culture in Peking University Cancer Hospital in China: baseline assessment and comparative analysis for quality improvement.

Xiyao Zhong, Yuqin Song, Christine Dennis, Donna J Slovensky, Lim Yee Wei, Jie Chen, Jiafu Ji

Open access · goldAbstract 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. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Xiyao ZhongKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yuqin SongKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Christine DennisAustralian Council Healthcare Standards, Ultimo, Australia.
Donna J SlovenskyProfessor and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Faculty Affairs, School of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Lim Yee WeiDepartment of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jie ChenDepartment of Health Services Administration, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Jiafu JiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. jijiafu@hsc.pku.edu.cn.
Peking University Cancer Hospital · CNAustralian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care · AUNational University of Singapore · SGPeking University · CNUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Incubating Program PG2018016.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLimited information is available regarding the patient safety culture in Chinese hospitals. This study aims to assess the patient safety culture in Peking University Cancer Hospital and to identify opportunities for improving the organization's safety culture.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in April 2018 and 2019, respectively. Data on patient safety culture were collected from clinical and administrative staffs using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC).

resultsTwelve composite dimension variables were hierarchically clustered. Three highest positive response dimensions include 'Organizational Learning and continuous improvement' (92.9%), 'Teamwork within units' (89.7%), and 'Hospital management support for patient safety' (83.7%), while 3 lowest positive response dimensions included 'Frequency of events reported' (43.9%), 'Non-punitive response to error' (51.1%), 'Communication openness' (52.2%), and 'Staffing' (53.7%). Compared to the average scores of the United States, the scores of the Peking University Cancer Hospital was significantly lower on 'Communication openness' and 'Frequency of events reported'. After targeted continuous improvement based on results in 2018, all 12 dimensions surprisingly increased in the safety culture conducted in 2019.

conclusionInadequate feedback and communications about error and lack of communication openness are key challenges for patient safety in the delivery of care in this hospital. Results of this baseline survey indicate the need for a modified approach and attention to context when designing interventions aimed at improving the safety culture in this organization.

Indexed as

Cancer Care FacilitiesPatient SafetyQuality ImprovementSafety ManagementChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Care SurveysHospital AdministrationHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesChinese hospitalsHospital survey on patient safety culture (HSOPSC)Patient safety

Identifiers

PMID31883512
PMCPMC6935497
OpenAlexW2997326461

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.