Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39865467›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025

Validation of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture 2.0 in Italian Hospitals: A Cross-Sectional Study of Healthcare Personnel Perceptions.

Annamaria Bagnasco, Gianluca Catania, Michele Tancredi Loiudice, Tommaso Bellandi, Bruno Cavaliere, Sara Carzaniga, Flavia Cardinali, Milko Zanini, Loredana Sasso, Working Group Study

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. 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
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Annamaria BagnascoDipartimento Scienze Della Salute, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9079-8460
Gianluca CataniaDipartimento Scienze Della Salute, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0862-071X
Michele Tancredi LoiudiceUOS Rischio clinico e Sicurezza delle cure, Agenas - Agenzia Nazionale per i Servizi Sanitari Regionali, Roma, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0320-3108
Tommaso BellandiDirettore UOC Sicurezza del Paziente, Azienda USL Toscana Nord Ovest, Lucca, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3087-1822
Bruno CavaliereDirettore Professioni Sanitarie, Ospedale IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4740-6656
Sara CarzanigaUOS Rischio clinico e Sicurezza delle cure, Agenas - Agenzia Nazionale per i Servizi Sanitari Regionali, Roma, Italy.
Flavia CardinaliUOS Rischio clinico e Sicurezza delle cure, Agenas - Agenzia Nazionale per i Servizi Sanitari Regionali, Roma, Italy.
Milko ZaniniDipartimento Scienze Della Salute, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1081-6279
Loredana SassoDipartimento Scienze Della Salute, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5886-5937
Working Group Study

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIM(S): To adapt and validate the HSOPS 2 instrument for the Italian context and to describe the current patient safety culture amongst healthcare personnel working in Italian hospitals.

designCross-sectional study.

methodsWe adapted and validated the HSOPS 2 instrument following the COSMIN guidelines: we performed a forward-backward translation, calculated the content validity index, evaluated face validity, acceptability (percentage of participants responding to all items on the questionnaire and to every specific item), construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis), and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha for each dimension). We then performed a cross-sectional study following the guidelines of the original instrument: we categorised the responses into "positive," "negative," and "midpoints." For each dimension we calculated the average percentage of positive responses. We repeated this process, dividing the responses by various sample characteristics (e.g., profession), and compared them using the chi-square test. Data were collected between April and November 2023.

resultsA total of 633 hospital personnel participated in the survey, and 473 completed the questionnaire in its entirety. The dimensions of "teamwork", "supervisor", "manager", or "clinical leader support", and "communication about error" emerged as dimensions with higher percentages of positive responses, while those that received lower percentages were "hospital management support for patient safety", "staffing and work pace", and "response to error". We identified statistically significant differences in many dimensions between gender, profession, and clinical inpatient units.

conclusionsThese findings provide a comprehensive overview of challenges and opportunities within the healthcare sector as regards patient safety culture and can inform the development of targeted interventions aimed at improving patient safety across healthcare organisations. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Proper assessment of safety culture, one of the main indicators of patient safety, can inform the development of effective strategies and interventions to enhance patient safety. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? To effectively assess patient safety culture, it is essential to use valid and reliable tools. It is crucial to proactively assess patient safety culture in hospital personnel, whether employed in clinical units, in management, or in support services, to develop initiatives aimed at improving patient safety. What were the main findings? The use of the adapted and validated version of the HSOPS 2 will produce valid and reliable evidence on patient safety culture. Perception of patient safety culture differs amongst respondents according to gender, profession, clinical setting. The dimensions of "hospital management support for patient safety", "staffing and work pace", and "response to error" were identified as those with the greatest need for improvement. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? Patient safety heavily impacts care at every level; therefore, this study could have an impact on healthcare organisations as well as healthcare workers, patients, and their families. By making available an instrument that can contribute to a proper assessment of patient safety culture, this study might contribute to the development of appropriate strategies and targeted interventions to improve patient safety, quality of care and satisfaction while decreasing adverse events and related costs. REPORTING

methodThe COSMIN guidelines were used for the validation of the instrument; the STROBE reporting guidelines were used for the cross-sectional study. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelOrganizational CulturePatient SafetyPersonnel, HospitalSafety ManagementAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitalsHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairespatient safetysafety culturesafety management

Identifiers

PMID39865467
PMCPMC12535336

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.