Safety climate and mindful safety practices in the oil and gas industry.

INTRODUCTION: The existence of a positive association between safety climate and the safety behavior of sharp-end workers in high-risk organizations is supported by a considerable body of research. Previous research has primarily analyzed two components of safety behavior, namely safety compliance and safety participation. The present study extends previous research by looking into the relationship between safety climate and another component of safety behavior, namely mindful safety practices. Mindful safety practices are defined as the ability to be aware of critical factors in the environment and to act appropriately when dangers arise. METHOD: Regression analysis was used to examine whether mindful safety practices are, like compliance and participation, promoted by a positive safety climate, in a questionnaire-based study of 5712 sharp-end workers in the oil and gas industry. RESULTS: The analysis revealed that a positive safety climate promotes mindful safety practices. CONCLUSIONS: The regression model accounted for roughly 31% of the variance in mindful safety practices. The most important safety climate factor was safety leadership. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The findings clearly demonstrate that mindful safety practices are highly context-dependent, hence, manageable and susceptible to change. In order to improve safety climate in a direction which is favorable for mindful safety practices, the results demonstrate that it is important to give the fundamental features of safety climate high priority and in particular that of safety leadership.

Measuring and comparing safety climate in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Learning about the factors that influence safety climate and improving the methods for assessing relative performance among hospital or units would improve decision-making for clinical improvement. OBJECTIVES: To measure safety climate in intensive care units (ICU) owned by a large for-profit integrated health delivery systems; identify specific provider, ICU, and hospital factors that influence safety climate; and improve the reporting of safety climate data for comparison and benchmarking. RESEARCH DESIGN: We administered the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) to clinicians, staff, and administrators in 110 ICUs from 61 hospitals. SUBJECTS: A total of 1502 surveys (43% response) from physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, mangers, and other ancillary providers. MEASURES: The survey measured safety climate across 6 domains: teamwork climate; safety climate; perceptions of management; job satisfaction; working conditions; and stress recognition. Percentage of positive scores, mean scores, unadjusted random effects, and covariate-adjusted random effect were used to rank ICU performance. RESULTS: The cohort was characterized by a positive safety climate. Respondents scored perceptions of management and working conditions significantly lower than the other domains of safety climate. Respondent job type was significantly associated with safety climate and domain scores. There was modest agreement between ranking methodologies using raw scores and random effects. CONCLUSIONS: The relative proportion of job type must be considered before comparing safety climate results across organizational units. Ranking methodologies based on raw scores and random effects are viable for feedback reports. The use of covariate-adjusted random effects is recommended for hospital decision-making.

Are health systems changing in support of patient safety? A multi-methods evaluation of education, attitudes and practice.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of a health system-wide safety improvement program (SIP) three to four years after initial implementation. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The study employs multi-methods studies involving questionnaire surveys, focus groups, in-depth interviews, observational work, ethnographic studies, documentary analysis and literature reviews with regard to the state of New South Wales, Australia, where 90,000 health professionals, under the auspices of the Health Department, provide healthcare to a seven-million population. After enrolling many participants from various groups, the measurements included: numbers of staff trained and training quality; support for SIP; clinicians' reports of safety skills acquired, work practices changed and barriers to progress; RCAs undertaken; observation of functioning of teams; committees initiated and staff appointed to deal with adverse events; documentation and computer records of reports; and peak-level responses to adverse events. FINDINGS: A cohort of 4 per cent of the state's health professionals has been trained and now applies safety skills and conducts RCAs. These and other senior professionals strongly support SIP, though many think further culture change is required if its benefits are to be more fully achieved and sustained. Improved information-handling systems have been adopted. Systems for reporting adverse incidents and conducting RCAs have been instituted, which are co-ordinated by NSW Health. When the appropriate structures, educational activities and systems are made available in the form of an SIP, measurable systems change might be introduced, as suggested by observations of the attitudes and behaviours of health practitioners and the increased reporting of, and action about, adverse events. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Few studies into health systems change employ wide-ranging research methods and metrics. This study helps to fill this gap.

Safer injections following a new national medicine policy in the public sector, Burkina Faso 1995-2000.

BACKGROUND: The common failure of health systems to ensure adequate and sufficient supplies of injection devices may have a negative impact on injection safety. We conducted an assessment in April 2001 to determine to which extent an increase in safe injection practices between 1995 and 2000 was related to the increased access to injection devices because of a new essential medicine policy in Burkina Faso. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes of the new medicine policy implemented in 1995. In April 2001, a retrospective programme review assessed the situation between 1995 and 2000. We visited 52 health care facilities where injections had been observed during a 2000 injection safety assessment and their adjacent operational public pharmaceutical depots. Data collection included structured observations of available injection devices and an estimation of the proportion of prescriptions including at least one injection. We interviewed wholesaler managers at national and regional levels on supply of injection devices to public health facilities. RESULTS: Fifty of 52 (96%) health care facilities were equipped with a pharmaceutical depot selling syringes and needles, 37 (74%) of which had been established between 1995 and 2000. Of 50 pharmaceutical depots, 96% had single-use 5 ml syringes available. At all facilities, patients were buying syringes and needles out of the depot for their injections prescribed at the dispensary. While injection devices were available in greater quantities, the proportion of prescriptions including at least one injection remained stable between 1995 (26.5%) and 2000 (23.8%). CONCLUSION: The implementation of pharmaceutical depots next to public health care facilities increased geographical access to essential medicines and basic supplies, among which syringes and needles, contributing substantially to safer injection practices in the absence of increased use of therapeutic injections.

The National Survey of Local Anaesthesia for Ocular Surgery. I. Survey methodology and current practice.

PURPOSE: To describe the current usage of the various techniques of local anaesthesia (LA) in the United Kingdom, and safety precautions taken. METHODS: An observational study of practice of LA in the whole of the United Kingdom was carried out over 3 months in late 1996. Staff in all ophthalmology theatres in the National Health Service were invited to report every LA given for the purpose of intraocular surgery during the first week, and thereafter to report adverse events only. RESULTS: Participation during the first week was calculated to be 72.8% overall. Anaesthesia techniques for intraocular surgery were: 70% LA alone, 5.8% LA with sedation and 24.2% general anaesthesia. LA techniques were: 65.6% peribulbar, 16.9% retrobulbar, 6.7% sub-Tenon's, 4.4% subconjunctival, 2.9% topical and 2.3% combinations. Of patients who were given LA, 96% were monitored, 84% had an anaesthetist available in theatres in case of a problem and intravenous access was established in 60%. CONCLUSION: Local anaesthesia is frequently used for intraocular surgery in the United Kingdom. A variety of techniques are used, and safety precautions are taken in most cases.