Initial Development of a Scale to Measure Patient Psychological Safety.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Paul J Hershberger, Timothy N Crawford, Angie Castle, Sarah K Hiett, Roselle Bea P Almazan, Khadijah C Collins, Jared M Burkert, David G Fields, Sarah G Yu, Katharine Conway
{"title":"Initial Development of a Scale to Measure Patient Psychological Safety.","authors":"Paul J Hershberger, Timothy N Crawford, Angie Castle, Sarah K Hiett, Roselle Bea P Almazan, Khadijah C Collins, Jared M Burkert, David G Fields, Sarah G Yu, Katharine Conway","doi":"10.3122/jabfm.2023.230465R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Psychological safety is the perception that it is safe to express oneself without fear of ridicule. Better patient outcomes are associated with health care teams that experience psychological safety. However, the psychological safety of the patient has largely been ignored, even though it may affect patient forthrightness and adherence. We developed an initial Patient Psychological Safety Scale (PPSS) to assess patients' experience of psychological safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirteen items modified from team-focused measures of psychological safety comprised the initial version of the PPSS. To explore criterion validity, 8 items pertaining to nondisclosure of important information were used. A convenience sample of 100 patients from 4 primary care settings completed a survey comprised of the PPSS and nondisclosure questions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the 13-item PPSS did not measure 1 factor. A subsequent exploratory factor analysis (EFA) identified 2 factors. A second CFA was conducted on a modified 9-item PPSS representing the 2 factors and retaining items with a factor loading of 0.40 or higher, and the results indicated a good fit. Internal reliability and validity for factors 1 (relationship comfort) (α = 0.95) and 2 (belonging) (α = 0.88) were strong. Although few respondents endorsed nondisclosure, there was a significant association between lower relationship comfort and nondisclosure of disagreement with clinician recommendation (median difference = 5.0, <i>P</i> = .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients' experience of psychological safety may affect clinical outcomes. The PPSS provides a starting point for further study of this potentially important variable.</p>","PeriodicalId":50018,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","volume":"37 5","pages":"809-815"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2023.230465R1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Psychological safety is the perception that it is safe to express oneself without fear of ridicule. Better patient outcomes are associated with health care teams that experience psychological safety. However, the psychological safety of the patient has largely been ignored, even though it may affect patient forthrightness and adherence. We developed an initial Patient Psychological Safety Scale (PPSS) to assess patients' experience of psychological safety.

Methods: Thirteen items modified from team-focused measures of psychological safety comprised the initial version of the PPSS. To explore criterion validity, 8 items pertaining to nondisclosure of important information were used. A convenience sample of 100 patients from 4 primary care settings completed a survey comprised of the PPSS and nondisclosure questions.

Results: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the 13-item PPSS did not measure 1 factor. A subsequent exploratory factor analysis (EFA) identified 2 factors. A second CFA was conducted on a modified 9-item PPSS representing the 2 factors and retaining items with a factor loading of 0.40 or higher, and the results indicated a good fit. Internal reliability and validity for factors 1 (relationship comfort) (α = 0.95) and 2 (belonging) (α = 0.88) were strong. Although few respondents endorsed nondisclosure, there was a significant association between lower relationship comfort and nondisclosure of disagreement with clinician recommendation (median difference = 5.0, P = .001).

Conclusions: Patients' experience of psychological safety may affect clinical outcomes. The PPSS provides a starting point for further study of this potentially important variable.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
168
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1988, the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine ( JABFM ) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM). Believing that the public and scientific communities are best served by open access to information, JABFM makes its articles available free of charge and without registration at www.jabfm.org. JABFM is indexed by Medline, Index Medicus, and other services.
×
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