RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyze speaking up behavior and safety climate with a validated questionnaire for the first time in an Austrian university hospital. DESIGN: Survey amongst healthcare workers (HCW). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alpha was calculated as a measure of internal consistencies of scales. Analysis of variance and t-tests were used. SETTING: The survey was conducted in 2017. PARTICIPANTS: About 2.149 HCW from three departments were asked to participate. INTERVENTION: To measure speaking up behavior and safety climate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: To explore psychological safety, encouraging environment and resignation towards speaking up. RESULTS: About 859 evaluable questionnaires were returned (response rate: 40%). More than 50% of responders perceived specific concerns about patient safety within the last 4 weeks and observed a potential error or noticed rule violations. For the different items, between 16% and 42% of HCW reported that they remained silent though concerns for safety. In contrast, between 96% and 98% answered that they did speak up in certain situations. The psychological safety for speaking up was lower for HCW with a managerial function (P < 0.001). HCW with managerial functions perceived the environment as less encouraging to speak up (P < 0.05) than HCW without managerial function. CONCLUSIONS: We identified speaking up behaviors for the first time in an Austrian university hospital. Only moderately frequent concerns were in conflict with frequent speaking up behaviors. These results clearly show that a paradigm shift is needed to increase speaking up culture.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Cultura Organizacional , Segurança do Paciente , Recursos Humanos em Hospital/psicologia , Áustria , Comunicação , Feminino , Hospitais Universitários , Humanos , Masculino , Gestão da Segurança/métodos , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality conferences (M&MC) are a tool to foster individual and organizational learning in hospitals, and they are important to improve patient safety. So far, no data has been available about the implementation of M&MC in Lower Saxony and the characteristics of M&MCs. The aim of this study was to assess the status quo of M&MC in Lower Saxony and to identify the potential for improvement. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted among chief physicians in surgery, internal medicine, anesthesiology/intensive care, gynecology/obstetrics and pediatrics (response rate: 50 %). RESULTS: Apart from technical topics (37 %), the main issues addressed are process (92 %) and teamwork (64 %) issues. The results also show a strong heterogeneity in terms of structures and processes of implemented M&MC in Lower Saxony. Despite a high level of satisfaction (85 %) and perceived effectiveness (93 %), most participants see potential for improvement of "their" M&MC (58 %). CONCLUSION: Chief physicians in Lower Saxony report both a high level of acceptance and the need for further improvement of the M&MCs, which represents good preconditions for further development towards effective M&MCs.