Patient safety in primary care has many aspects: an interview study in primary care doctors and nurses.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Scientific definitions of patient safety may be difficult to apply in routine health care delivery. It is unknown what primary care workers consider patient safety. This study aimed to clarify the concept of patient safety in primary care. METHODS: We held 29 semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of primary care doctors and nurses regarding their perceptions of patient safety. The answers were analysed in an iterative procedure with respect to common themes. RESULTS: A broad range of specific aspects of primary care were named in relation with patient safety. Medication safety was most frequently mentioned. Most items were categorized as organizational, while the remaining aspects were linked to culture or professionalism. Scientific definitions of patient safety were not mentioned, but some primary care workers gave 'do not harm the patient' as a short definition for patient safety. CONCLUSION: Patient safety programmes have mostly targeted specific issues, such as incident reporting and medication safety. However, doctors and practice nurses had a broad view of what constitutes patient safety in primary care. This has implications for the measurement and improvement of patient safety in primary care.

Weaknesses, strengths and needs in fertility care according to patients.

BACKGROUND: The patients' role in assessing health care quality is increasingly recognized. Measuring patients' specific experiences and needs generates concrete information for care improvement, whereas satisfaction surveys only give an overoptimistic, undifferentiating picture. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate possible weaknesses, strengths and needs in fertility care by measuring patients' specific experiences. METHODS: Mixed (qualitative and quantitative) methods were used to identify weaknesses, strengths and needs in fertility care. Four focus groups with 21 infertile patients were used for documenting care aspects relevant to patients. The fully transcribed qualitative results were analysed and converted into a 124-item questionnaire, to investigate whether these aspects were regarded as weaknesses, strengths or needs in fertility care. The questionnaire was distributed to 369 eligible couples attending 13 Dutch fertility clinics. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the quantity of the weaknesses, strengths and needs. RESULTS: Overall, 286 women (78%) and 280 men (76%) completed the questionnaire. Patients experienced many weaknesses in fertility care, mostly regarding emotional support and continuity of care. Respect and autonomy and partner involvement were considered strengths in current care. Furthermore, women expressed their need for more doctors' continuity during their treatment, and couples strongly desired to have free access to their own medical record. The questionnaire's internal consistency and construct validity were sufficient. CONCLUSIONS: Infertile couples experience strengths, but also many weaknesses and needs in current fertility care. Lack of patient centredness seems to be a major cause herein. Using mixed methods is a sensitive means for identifying these weaknesses and needs.