Organizational Factors That Promote Error Reporting in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Dawn Wawersik, Janice Palaganas
{"title":"Organizational Factors That Promote Error Reporting in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Dawn Wawersik,&nbsp;Janice Palaganas","doi":"10.1097/JHM-D-21-00166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Goal: </strong>The overarching aim of this systematic review was to offer guidelines for organizations and healthcare providers to create psychological safety in error reporting. The authors wanted to identify organizational factors that promote psychological safety for error reporting and identify gaps in the literature to explore innovative avenues for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors conducted an online search of peer-reviewed articles that contain organizational processes promoting or preventing error reporting. The search yielded 420 articles published from 2015 to 2021. From this set, 52 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Data from 29 articles were evaluated for quality using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools.</p><p><strong>Principal findings: </strong>We present a narrative review of the 29 studies that reported factors either promoting error reporting or serving as barriers. We also present our findings in tables to highlight the most frequently reported themes. Our findings reveal that many healthcare organizations work at opposite ends of the process continuum to achieve the same goals. Finally, our results highlight the need to explore cultural differences and personal biases among both healthcare leaders and clinicians.</p><p><strong>Applications to practice: </strong>The findings underscore the need for a deeper dive into understanding error reporting from the perspective of individual characteristics and organizational interests toward increasing psychological safety in healthcare teams and the workplace to strengthen patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":51633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Management","volume":"67 4","pages":"283-301"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHM-D-21-00166","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Goal: The overarching aim of this systematic review was to offer guidelines for organizations and healthcare providers to create psychological safety in error reporting. The authors wanted to identify organizational factors that promote psychological safety for error reporting and identify gaps in the literature to explore innovative avenues for future research.

Methods: The authors conducted an online search of peer-reviewed articles that contain organizational processes promoting or preventing error reporting. The search yielded 420 articles published from 2015 to 2021. From this set, 52 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Data from 29 articles were evaluated for quality using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools.

Principal findings: We present a narrative review of the 29 studies that reported factors either promoting error reporting or serving as barriers. We also present our findings in tables to highlight the most frequently reported themes. Our findings reveal that many healthcare organizations work at opposite ends of the process continuum to achieve the same goals. Finally, our results highlight the need to explore cultural differences and personal biases among both healthcare leaders and clinicians.

Applications to practice: The findings underscore the need for a deeper dive into understanding error reporting from the perspective of individual characteristics and organizational interests toward increasing psychological safety in healthcare teams and the workplace to strengthen patient safety.

促进医疗保健中错误报告的组织因素:范围审查。
目的:本系统综述的总体目标是为组织和医疗保健提供者提供指南,以创建错误报告的心理安全。作者想要确定促进错误报告心理安全的组织因素,并找出文献中的空白,为未来的研究探索创新途径。方法:作者对同行评议的文章进行了在线搜索,其中包含促进或防止错误报告的组织过程。该搜索获得了2015年至2021年发表的420篇文章。从这组文章中,评估了52篇全文文章的合格性。使用乔安娜布里格斯研究所的关键评估工具对29篇文章的数据进行质量评估。主要发现:我们对29项研究进行了叙述性回顾,这些研究报告了促进错误报告或作为障碍的因素。我们还在表格中展示了我们的发现,以突出最常报道的主题。我们的研究结果表明,许多医疗保健组织在流程连续体的两端工作,以实现相同的目标。最后,我们的研究结果强调需要探索医疗保健领导者和临床医生之间的文化差异和个人偏见。实践中的应用:研究结果强调需要从个人特征和组织利益的角度深入了解错误报告,以提高医疗团队和工作场所的心理安全,从而加强患者安全。
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
Journal of Healthcare Management
Journal of Healthcare Management HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The Journal of Healthcare Management is the official journal of the American College of Healthcare Executives. Six times per year, JHM offers timely healthcare management articles that inform and guide executives, managers, educators, and researchers. JHM also contains regular columns written by experts and practitioners in the field that discuss management-related topics and industry trends. Each issue presents an interview with a leading executive.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信