Evolución de la percepción de la cultura de seguridad de los profesionales sanitarios en una urgencia pediátrica

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
B. Collado-González, C. Ferrero-García-Loygorri, M. Escobar-Castellanos, V. Barrera-Brito, M. Salvador-Rodríguez, R. Marañón, A. Mora-Capín
{"title":"Evolución de la percepción de la cultura de seguridad de los profesionales sanitarios en una urgencia pediátrica","authors":"B. Collado-González,&nbsp;C. Ferrero-García-Loygorri,&nbsp;M. Escobar-Castellanos,&nbsp;V. Barrera-Brito,&nbsp;M. Salvador-Rodríguez,&nbsp;R. Marañón,&nbsp;A. Mora-Capín","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2023.11.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and aim</h3><p>Safety culture (SC) is a fundamental tool for minimizing adverse events and improving safety and quality of care. Our objective, therefore was to analyze the evolution of the SC of healthcare professionals in a pediatric emergency department (PED) after the implementation of a risk management system for patient safety based on the UNE:EN:ISO 179003 Standard and the execution of new safe practices for Joint Commission International accreditation. At the same time describe the current strengths and weaknesses.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Quasi-experimental, single-center study. All PED professionals participated in the study. An initial measurement of SC was performed through the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) questionnaire of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality adapted to Spanish in 2014. Pro-patient safety strategies were implemented between 2015 and 2022. A subsequent measurement was performed in 2022.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The response rate in 2014 was 55% and 78% in 2022. On both occasions the group with the highest participation was nurses with 35.1% and 34.8%, respectively.</p><p>Five dimensions improved after the interventions: frequency of adverse events (25.2%, <em>p</em><span>&lt;</span>0.001), organizational learning (25%, <em>p</em><span>&lt;</span>0.001), feedback and communication about errors (22.3%, <em>p</em><span>&lt;</span>0.001), non-punitive response to errors (6.5%, <em>p</em> = 0.176), and management support (4%, <em>p</em> = 0.333).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The actions carried out had a positive influence on organizational learning and the frequency of adverse events reported and communication within the team. In contrast, the perception of SC did not increase.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2603647923000738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim

Safety culture (SC) is a fundamental tool for minimizing adverse events and improving safety and quality of care. Our objective, therefore was to analyze the evolution of the SC of healthcare professionals in a pediatric emergency department (PED) after the implementation of a risk management system for patient safety based on the UNE:EN:ISO 179003 Standard and the execution of new safe practices for Joint Commission International accreditation. At the same time describe the current strengths and weaknesses.

Methods

Quasi-experimental, single-center study. All PED professionals participated in the study. An initial measurement of SC was performed through the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) questionnaire of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality adapted to Spanish in 2014. Pro-patient safety strategies were implemented between 2015 and 2022. A subsequent measurement was performed in 2022.

Results

The response rate in 2014 was 55% and 78% in 2022. On both occasions the group with the highest participation was nurses with 35.1% and 34.8%, respectively.

Five dimensions improved after the interventions: frequency of adverse events (25.2%, p<0.001), organizational learning (25%, p<0.001), feedback and communication about errors (22.3%, p<0.001), non-punitive response to errors (6.5%, p = 0.176), and management support (4%, p = 0.333).

Conclusions

The actions carried out had a positive influence on organizational learning and the frequency of adverse events reported and communication within the team. In contrast, the perception of SC did not increase.

[儿科急诊室医护人员对安全文化认知的演变]。
背景和目的:安全文化(SC)是减少不良事件、提高医疗安全和质量的基本工具。因此,我们的目标是分析儿科急诊科(PED)在实施基于 UNE:EN:ISO 179003 标准的患者安全风险管理系统和执行国际联合委员会认证的新安全实践后,医护人员安全文化的演变情况。同时说明目前的优缺点:方法:准实验、单中心研究。所有 PED 专业人员都参与了研究。通过医疗保健研究与质量机构 2014 年根据西班牙语改编的 "医院患者安全文化调查"(HSOPS)问卷,对患者安全文化进行了初步测量。在 2015 年至 2022 年期间,实施了有利于患者安全的策略。2022 年进行了后续测量:结果:2014 年的回复率为 55%,2022 年为 78%。在这两次调查中,参与率最高的群体是护士,分别为 35.1%和 34.8%。干预后有五个方面得到了改善:不良事件的发生频率(25.2%,p)、不良事件的发生率(25.2%,p)和不良事件的发生率(34.8%,p):所采取的行动对组织学习、不良事件报告频率和团队内部沟通产生了积极影响。相比之下,对 SC 的认识并没有提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信