Search results

Improving hospital patient safety means an open and stimulating culture is needed. This article aims to describe a patient safety culture improvement approach in five Belgian hospitals.

Patient safety culture was measured using a validated Belgian adaptation of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) questionnaire. Studies before (autumn 2005) and after (spring 2007) the improvement approach was implemented were completed. Using HSOPSC, safety culture was measured using 12 dimensions. Results are presented as evolving dimension scores.

Overall, 3,940 and 3,626 individuals responded respectively to the first and second surveys (overall response rate was 77 and 68 percent respectively). After an 18 to 26 month period, significant improvement was observed for the “hospital management support for patient safety” dimension – all main effects were found to be significant. Regression analysis suggests there is a significant difference between professional subgroups. In one hospital the “supervisor expectations and actions promoting safety” improved. The dimension “teamwork within hospital units” received the highest scores in both surveys. There was no improvement and sometimes declining scores in the lowest scoring dimensions: “hospital transfers and transitions”, “non‐punitive response to error”, and “staffing”.

The five participating hospitals were not randomly selected and therefore no representative conclusions can be made for the Belgian hospital sector as a whole. Only a quantitative approach to measuring safety culture was used. Qualitative approaches, focussing on specific safety cultures in specific parts of the participating hospitals, were not used.

Although much needs to be done on the road towards better hospital patient safety, the study presents lessons from various perspectives. It illustrates that hospital staff are highly motivated to participate in measuring patient safety culture. Safety domains that urgently need improvement in these hospitals are identified: hospital transfers and transitions; non‐punitive response to error; and staffing. It confirms that realising progress in patient safety culture, demonstrating at the same time that it is possible to improve management support, is complex.

Safety is an important service quality aspect. By measuring safety culture in hospitals, with a validated questionnaire, dimensions that need improvement were revealed thereby contributing to an enhancement plan.

The purpose of this paper is to measure patient safety culture in five Belgian general hospitals. Safety culture plays an important role in the approach towards greater patient safety in hospitals.

The Patient Safety Culture Hospital questionnaire was distributed hospital‐wide in five general hospitals. It evaluates ten patient safety culture dimensions and two outcomes. The scores were expressed as the percentage of positive answers towards patient safety for each dimension. The survey was conducted from March through November 2005. In total, 3,940 individuals responded (overall response rate = 77 per cent), including 2,813 nurses and assistants, 462 physicians, 397 physiotherapists, laboratory and radiology assistants, social workers and 64 pharmacists and pharmacy assistants.

The dimensional positive scores were found to be low to average in all the hospitals. The lowest scores were “hospital management support for patient safety” (35 per cent), “non‐punitive response to error” (36 per cent), “hospital transfers and transitions” (36 per cent), “staffing” (38 per cent), and “teamwork across hospital units” (40 per cent). The dimension “teamwork within hospital units” generated the highest score (70 per cent). Although the same dimensions were considered problematic in the different hospitals, important variations between the five hospitals were observed.

A comprehensive and tailor‐made plan to improve patient safety culture in these hospitals can now be developed.

Results indicate that important aspects of the patient safety culture in these hospitals need improvement. This is an important challenge to all stakeholders wishing to improve patient safety.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.