Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36536431›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Speaking up about patient safety concerns: view of nursing students.

Magdalena Hoffmann, Christine Maria Schwarz, David Schwappach, Chiara Banfi, Christoph Palli, Gerald Sendlhofer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Magdalena HoffmannExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 1, 8036, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1668-4294
Christine Maria SchwarzExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 1, 8036, Graz, Austria. christine.schwarz@medunigraz.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0924-2340
David SchwappachInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8668-3065
Chiara BanfiInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 2, 8036, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7683-1853
Christoph PalliInstitute of Health Care and Nursing, University of Applied Sciences FH Joanneum, Alte Poststrasse 149, 8020, Graz, Austria.
Gerald SendlhoferExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 1, 8036, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6538-3116
Medical University of Graz · ATFH JOANNEUM University of Applied Sciences · ATUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background"Speaking up" is considered an important patient safety behaviour. The main idea is to voice patient safety concerns; however, several studies revealed that the organisational culture can be obstructive. In previous studies, we already identified barriers for doctors, nurses and medical students. In the current study, we explore how nursing students use "speaking up" during their internship in an academic teaching hospital.

methodsBetween 2019 and 2020, 212 nursing students were invited to take part in the survey. The validated Speaking Up about Patient Safety Questionnaire (SUPS-Q) was used to assess speaking up behaviours in nursing students. The SUPS-Q consisted of three behaviour related scales (11 items), three culture related scales (11 items), a question regarding barriers to speak up as well as a clinical vignette assessing a hypothetical speaking up situation.

resultsIn total, 118 nursing students took part in the survey (response rate: 56%). Most of them noticed specific safety concerns, observed errors or rule violations. The vignette was seen as very realistic and harmful to the patient. However, the majority responded that they did not speak up and remained silent. They reported a rather discouraging environment and high levels of resignation towards speaking up. However, more advanced students were less likely to speak up than less advanced students (p = 0.027). Most relevant barriers were fear of negative reaction (64%), reaction not predictable (62%) and ineffectiveness (42%).

conclusionsSurvey results of nursing students imply that speaking-up behaviours and remaining silent are common behaviours and coexist in the same individual. The clinical vignette and barriers to speaking up revealed that a hierarchical system does not support speaking-up behaviours. Organizational development is needed to foster professional teamwork, support attentive listening, encourage critical thinking, and problem-solving skills.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyStudents, NursingAttitude of Health PersonnelHospitals, TeachingHumansOrganizational CultureCommunicationNursing studentsPatient safetySafety cultureSpeak-up

Identifiers

PMID36536431
PMCPMC9761031
OpenAlexW4312113589

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.