{"title":"为医院制定患者安全量表。","authors":"Metin Dinçer, Esra Karataş Okyay, Yunus Emre Karataş, Erol Göral","doi":"10.55730/1300-0144.5810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>The study aimed to contribute to the literature with a reliable and valid scale for hospitals to be used in determining the current patient safety culture and following up on its development.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was conducted with the participation of 1137 healthcare professionals selected using the convenience sampling method in 3 secondary-care state hospitals and three research and training hospitals, one of which was affiliated with a medical faculty, and two were affiliated with the Health Sciences University. To begin with, to discover the latent structure of the items on the scale, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed. Additionally, to determine the factor structure of the scale, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method was used. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to check the reliability of the responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO = 0.924) coefficient and the result of Bartlett's test of sphericity (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 9748.777, df = 770), it was determined that the data structure was suitable for factor analysis. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the total scale was found to be 0.921. According to the EFA results, the scale was determined to have seven subscales, which were 1. Organizational Learning, Development, and Communication, 2. Management Support and Leadership, 3. Reporting Patient Safety Events, 4. Number of Personnel and Working Hours, 5. Response to Error, 6. Teamwork, and 7. Working Environment. The goodness-of-fit index results of the scale showed a good model fit (<i>χ</i> <i><sup>2</sup></i> / df = 3.04, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.97, NFI = 0.95, IFI = 0.97, SRMR = 0.06). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the subscales varied between 0.66 and 0.91.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results showed that the Patient Safety Scale for Hospitals is a valid and reliable measurement instrument for healthcare professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":23361,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265919/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing patient safety scale for hospitals.\",\"authors\":\"Metin Dinçer, Esra Karataş Okyay, Yunus Emre Karataş, Erol Göral\",\"doi\":\"10.55730/1300-0144.5810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>The study aimed to contribute to the literature with a reliable and valid scale for hospitals to be used in determining the current patient safety culture and following up on its development.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was conducted with the participation of 1137 healthcare professionals selected using the convenience sampling method in 3 secondary-care state hospitals and three research and training hospitals, one of which was affiliated with a medical faculty, and two were affiliated with the Health Sciences University. To begin with, to discover the latent structure of the items on the scale, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed. Additionally, to determine the factor structure of the scale, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method was used. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to check the reliability of the responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO = 0.924) coefficient and the result of Bartlett's test of sphericity (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 9748.777, df = 770), it was determined that the data structure was suitable for factor analysis. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the total scale was found to be 0.921. According to the EFA results, the scale was determined to have seven subscales, which were 1. Organizational Learning, Development, and Communication, 2. Management Support and Leadership, 3. Reporting Patient Safety Events, 4. Number of Personnel and Working Hours, 5. Response to Error, 6. Teamwork, and 7. Working Environment. The goodness-of-fit index results of the scale showed a good model fit (<i>χ</i> <i><sup>2</sup></i> / df = 3.04, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.97, NFI = 0.95, IFI = 0.97, SRMR = 0.06). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the subscales varied between 0.66 and 0.91.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results showed that the Patient Safety Scale for Hospitals is a valid and reliable measurement instrument for healthcare professionals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265919/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55730/1300-0144.5810\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55730/1300-0144.5810","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Background/aim: The study aimed to contribute to the literature with a reliable and valid scale for hospitals to be used in determining the current patient safety culture and following up on its development.
Materials and methods: The study was conducted with the participation of 1137 healthcare professionals selected using the convenience sampling method in 3 secondary-care state hospitals and three research and training hospitals, one of which was affiliated with a medical faculty, and two were affiliated with the Health Sciences University. To begin with, to discover the latent structure of the items on the scale, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed. Additionally, to determine the factor structure of the scale, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method was used. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to check the reliability of the responses.
Results: According to Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO = 0.924) coefficient and the result of Bartlett's test of sphericity (χ2 = 9748.777, df = 770), it was determined that the data structure was suitable for factor analysis. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the total scale was found to be 0.921. According to the EFA results, the scale was determined to have seven subscales, which were 1. Organizational Learning, Development, and Communication, 2. Management Support and Leadership, 3. Reporting Patient Safety Events, 4. Number of Personnel and Working Hours, 5. Response to Error, 6. Teamwork, and 7. Working Environment. The goodness-of-fit index results of the scale showed a good model fit (χ2 / df = 3.04, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.97, NFI = 0.95, IFI = 0.97, SRMR = 0.06). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the subscales varied between 0.66 and 0.91.
Conclusion: The results showed that the Patient Safety Scale for Hospitals is a valid and reliable measurement instrument for healthcare professionals.
期刊介绍:
Turkish Journal of Medical sciences is a peer-reviewed comprehensive resource that provides critical up-to-date information on the broad spectrum of general medical sciences. The Journal intended to publish original medical scientific papers regarding the priority based on the prominence, significance, and timeliness of the findings. However since the audience of the Journal is not limited to any subspeciality in a wide variety of medical disciplines, the papers focusing on the technical details of a given medical subspeciality may not be evaluated for publication.