Methodological aspects of patient safety culture research: A scoping Review

T. A. S. Pol, Karla Crozeta Figueiredo, Patricia Cardoso Portella, A. S. Figueredo, Cleide Straub da Silva Bicalho
{"title":"Methodological aspects of patient safety culture research: A scoping Review","authors":"T. A. S. Pol, Karla Crozeta Figueiredo, Patricia Cardoso Portella, A. S. Figueredo, Cleide Straub da Silva Bicalho","doi":"10.5902/2236583465717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Investigating the safety culture has been relevant for more than two decades as a tool to improve the quality of patient care. This is a scope review of the last 20 years, whose objective is to investigate the type and prevalence of methodological approaches to patient safety culture and climate research. A review protocol was registered. The results were reported according to reports of preferred items for systematic reviews and extension of meta-analyzes for scope reviews (PRISMA-ScR). 107 studies were included. From the results, three major themes emerged for discussion, and the studies were classified into 1) Methodological approach and indeterminate use of concepts of climate and safety culture; 2) The isolated use of self-administered questionnaires in safety culture surveys and 3) A survey of the mixed methods approach in patient safety culture research. The quantitative approach was shown to be predominant, with the use of self-administered questionnaires for studies of the climate and culture of patient safety. The studies pointed out several limitations in the exclusive use of questionnaires, emphasizing the need to include multimethod research and the use of qualitative data collection techniques as an essential complement for the diagnosis of the patient safety culture.","PeriodicalId":33078,"journal":{"name":"Revista Saude","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Saude","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5902/2236583465717","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Investigating the safety culture has been relevant for more than two decades as a tool to improve the quality of patient care. This is a scope review of the last 20 years, whose objective is to investigate the type and prevalence of methodological approaches to patient safety culture and climate research. A review protocol was registered. The results were reported according to reports of preferred items for systematic reviews and extension of meta-analyzes for scope reviews (PRISMA-ScR). 107 studies were included. From the results, three major themes emerged for discussion, and the studies were classified into 1) Methodological approach and indeterminate use of concepts of climate and safety culture; 2) The isolated use of self-administered questionnaires in safety culture surveys and 3) A survey of the mixed methods approach in patient safety culture research. The quantitative approach was shown to be predominant, with the use of self-administered questionnaires for studies of the climate and culture of patient safety. The studies pointed out several limitations in the exclusive use of questionnaires, emphasizing the need to include multimethod research and the use of qualitative data collection techniques as an essential complement for the diagnosis of the patient safety culture.
患者安全文化研究的方法论方面:范围界定综述
20多年来,作为提高患者护理质量的工具,调查安全文化一直很重要。这是对过去20年的范围回顾,其目的是调查患者安全文化和气候研究的方法论方法的类型和流行率。已注册审查协议。根据系统评审的首选项目报告和范围评审的元分析扩展(PRISMA ScR)报告结果。纳入107项研究。从结果来看,出现了三个主要的讨论主题,研究分为:1)方法论方法和对气候和安全文化概念的不确定使用;2) 在安全文化调查中单独使用自我管理问卷,以及3)在患者安全文化研究中采用混合方法的调查。定量方法被证明是主要的,使用自我管理的问卷调查来研究患者安全的气候和文化。这些研究指出了仅使用问卷的几个局限性,强调需要包括多方法研究和使用定性数据收集技术,作为诊断患者安全文化的重要补充。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
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
小红书