Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40045553›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025

Safety Culture Through Patient Voice: Qualitative Validation of the Patients' Perceptions of Safety Culture Scale (PaPSC) in Cardiology and Cardiothoracic Surgery.

Clara Monaca, Matthias Weigl, Holger Pfaff, Antje Hammer

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Clara MonacaInstitute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science (IMVR), Faculty of Human Sciences & Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0009-0000-0966-5664
Matthias WeiglInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2408-1725
Holger PfaffInstitute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science (IMVR), Faculty of Human Sciences & Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9154-6575
Antje HammerGerman Association of Paediatric and Adolescent Care Specialists (Berufsverband der Kinder- und Jugendärzt*innen e.V., BVKJ), Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2724-9901

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe 11-item Patients' Perception of Safety Culture Scale (PaPSC) measures patients' perceptions of the safety culture within healthcare organizations. While patients can respond to these items, factors such as limited knowledge, unclear roles and insufficient information may influence their assessments. Despite previous research on the PaPSC, no qualitative validation has been conducted. This study addresses this gap by exploring patients' perspectives on safety culture.

methodsA qualitative, exploratory approach was adopted, employing problem-centred interviews with patients from the cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery wards of a tertiary care university hospital. Thematic coding combining deductive and inductive methods was used to identify predefined and emergent themes.

resultsData saturation was reached after 22 interviews, providing a comprehensive account of patients' experiences. Most patients were able to respond to the PaPSC items, confirming its robustness in assessing safety culture. However, they emphasized interpersonal aspects such as empathy, trust and clear communication, and contextual elements such as the care environment and patient-staff interactions, which are less well represented in standardized instruments. Several items were perceived as ambiguous, highlighting the need for explanatory text to enhance clarity and response accuracy.

conclusionsThis study underscores the value of integrating qualitative methods with standardized tools such as the PaPSC to reveal nuanced aspects of safety culture. Active patient involvement in tool development can improve the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of safety interventions. Ensuring that safety culture assessments accurately reflect patients' experiences and needs contributes to more patient-centred healthcare practices. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Problem-centred interviews and the Think-Aloud method were used in this study to ensure active patient participation. Patients contributes by identifying areas where survey items needed further clarification or contextualization, thereby enhancing the validity and usability of the Patients' Perception of Safety Culture Scale (PaPSC). Their feedback also led to the refinements in the study design and tools, underscoring the importance of patient-centred approaches in healthcare safety research. Although patients were not directly involved in the study design, since the PaPSC scale items were predefined and derived from a prior critical review of existing instruments, their role in this validation study was crucial. The study aimed not to develop new items but to assess the applicability and clarity of an established instrument. The study empowered the patients to share their views openly in a supportive and respectful environment, offering valuable insights for improving safety culture assessment.

Indexed as

CardiologyOrganizational CulturePatient SafetySafety ManagementAdultAgedFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionQualitative ResearchSurveys and Questionnairesinterpersonal factorspatient‐centred carepatient perspectivepatient safetyqualitative validationsafety culture

Identifiers

PMID40045553
PMCPMC11882746

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.