Different stakeholder perspectives on NHS safety.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discuses some key NHS stakeholder perspectives on NHS patient safety.

Exploring the impact of compassion and leadership on patient safety and quality in healthcare systems: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety and healthcare quality are considered integral parts of the healthcare system that are driven by a dynamic combination of human and non-human factors. This review article provides an insight into the two major human factors that impact patient safety and quality including compassion and leadership. It also discusses how compassion is different from empathy and explores the impact of both compassion and leadership on patient safety and healthcare quality. In addition, this review also provides strategies for the improvement of patient safety and healthcare quality through compassion and effective leadership. METHODS: This narrative review explores the existing literature on compassion and leadership and their combined impact on patient safety and healthcare quality. The literature for this purpose was gathered from published research articles, reports, recommendations and guidelines. RESULTS: The findings from the literature suggest that both compassion and transformational leadership can create a positive culture where healthcare professionals (HCPs) prioritise patient safety and quality. Leaders who exhibit compassion are more likely to inspire their teams to deliver patient-centred care and focus on error prevention. CONCLUSION: Compassion can become an antidote for the burnout of HCPs. Compassion is a behaviour that is not only inherited but can also be learnt. Both compassionate care and transformational leadership improve organisational culture, patient experience, patient engagement, outcomes and overall healthcare excellence. We propose that transformational leadership that reinforces compassion remarkably improves patient safety, patient engagement and quality.

Determining the psychometric properties of a written test to assess safe dental practice.

INTRODUCTION: Safe practice in medicine and dentistry has been a global priority area in which large knowledge gaps are present.Patient safety strategies aim at preventing unintended damage to patients that can be caused by healthcare practitioners. One of the components of patient safety is safe clinical practice. Patient safety efforts will help in ensuring safe dental practice for early detection and limiting non-preventable errors.A valid and reliable instrument is required to assess the knowledge of dental students regarding patient safety. OBJECTIVE: To determine the psychometric properties of a written test to assess safe dental practice in undergraduate dental students. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A test comprising 42 multiple-choice questions of one-best type was administered to final year students (52) of a private dental college. Items were developed according to National Board of Medical Examiners item writing guidelines. The content of the test was determined in consultation with dental experts (either professor or associate professor). These experts had to assess each item on the test for language clarity as A: clear, B: ambiguous and relevance as 1: essential, 2: useful, not necessary, 3: not essential. Ethical approval was taken from the concerned dental college. Statistical analysis was done in SPSS V.25 in which descriptive analysis, item analysis and Cronbach's alpha were measured. RESULT: The test scores had a reliability (calculated by Cronbach's alpha) of 0.722 before and 0.855 after removing 15 items. CONCLUSION: A reliable and valid test was developed which will help to assess the knowledge of dental students regarding safe dental practice. This can guide medical educationist to develop or improve patient safety curriculum to ensure safe dental practice.

Understanding patient safety in dentistry: evaluating the present and envisioning the future-a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is crucial in dentistry, yet it has received delayed recognition compared with other healthcare fields. This literature review assesses the current state of patient safety in dentistry, investigates the reasons for the delay, and offers recommendations for enhancing patient safety in dental practices, dental schools, and hospitals. METHODS: The review incorporates a thorough analysis of existing literature on patient safety in dentistry. Various sources, including research articles, guidelines and reports, were reviewed to gather insights into patient safety definitions, challenges and best practices specific to dentistry. RESULTS: The review underscores the importance of prioritising patient safety in dentistry at all levels of healthcare. It identifies key definitions and factors contributing to the delayed focus on patient safety in the field. Additionally, it emphasises the significance of establishing a patient safety culture and discusses approaches such as safety plans, incident management systems, blame-free cultures and ethical frameworks to enhance patient safety. CONCLUSION: Patient safety is vital in dentistry to ensure high-quality care and patient well-being. The review emphasises the importance of prioritising patient safety in dental practices, dental schools and hospitals. Through the implementation of recommended strategies and best practices, dental organisations can cultivate a patient safety culture, enhance communication, mitigate risks and continually improve patient safety outcomes. The dissemination of knowledge and the active involvement of all stakeholders are crucial for promoting patient safety and establishing a safe dental healthcare system.

Effect of interventions to improve safety culture on healthcare workers in hospital settings: a systematic review of the international literature.

BACKGROUND: In an era of safety systems, hospital interventions to build a culture of safety deliver organisational learning methodologies for staff. Their benefits to hospital staff are unknown. We examined the literature for evidence of staff outcomes. Research questions were: (1) how is safety culture defined in studies with interventions that aim to enhance it?; (2) what effects do interventions to improve safety culture have on hospital staff?; (3) what intervention features explain these effects? and (4) what staff outcomes and experiences are identified? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review of published literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Health Business Elite and Scopus. We adopted a convergent approach to synthesis and integration. Identified intervention and staff outcomes were categorised thematically and combined with available data on measures and effects. RESULTS: We identified 42 articles for inclusion. Safety culture outcomes were most prominent under the themes of leadership and teamwork. Specific benefits for staff included increased stress recognition and job satisfaction, reduced emotional exhaustion, burnout and turnover, and improvements to working conditions. Effects were documented for interventions with longer time scales, strong institutional support and comprehensive theory-informed designs situated within specific units. DISCUSSION: This review contributes to international evidence on how interventions to improve safety culture may benefit hospital staff and how they can be designed and implemented. A focus on staff outcomes includes staff perceptions and behaviours as part of a safety culture and staff experiences resulting from a safety culture. The results generated by a small number of articles varied in quality and effect, and the review focused only on hospital staff. There is merit in using the concept of safety culture as a lens to understand staff experience in a complex healthcare system.

Interplay between leadership and patient safety in dentistry: a dental hospital-based cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to study the association of leadership practices and patient safety culture in a dental hospital. DESIGN: Hospital-based, cross-sectional study SETTING: Riphah Dental Hospital (RDH), Islamabad, Pakistan. PARTICIPANTS: All dentists working at RDH were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A questionnaire comprised of the Transformational Leadership Scale (TLS) and the Dental adapted version of the Medical Office Survey of Patient Safety Culture (DMOSOPS) was distributed among the participants. The response rates for each dimension were calculated. The positive responses were added to calculate scores for each of the patient safety and leadership dimensions and the Total Leadership Score (TLS) and total patient safety score (TPSS). Correlational analysis is performed to assess any associations. RESULTS: A total of 104 dentists participated in the study. A high positive response was observed on three of the leadership dimensions: inspirational communication (85.25%), intellectual stimulation (86%), and supportive leadership (75.17%). A low positive response was found on the following items: 'acknowledges improvement in my quality of work' (19%) and 'has a clear sense of where he/she wants our unit to be in 5 years' (35.64%). The reported positive responses in the patient safety dimensions were high on three of the patient safety dimensions: organisational learning (78.41%), teamwork (82.91%), and patient care tracking/follow-up (77.05%); and low on work pressure and pace (32.02%). A moderately positive correlation was found between TLS and TPSS (r=0.455, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Leadership was found to be associated with patient safety culture in a dental hospital. Leadership training programmes should be incorporated during dental training to prepare future leaders who can inspire a positive patient safety culture.

Regional perspectives on patient safety policies and initiatives: a focus group study with patient safety leaders in the Middle East and Asian regions.

Preventing and reducing risks and harm to patients is of critical importance as unsafe care is a leading cause of death and disability globally. However, the lack of consolidated information on patient safety policies and initiatives at regional levels represents an evidence gap with implications for policy and planning. The aim of the study was to answer the question of what patient safety policies and initiatives are currently in place in the Middle East and Asian regions and what were the main strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in developing these. A qualitative approach using online focus groups was adopted. Participants attended focus groups beginning in August 2022. A topic guide was developed using a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats framework analysis approach. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist was used to ensure the recommended standards of qualitative data reporting were met. 21 participants from 11 countries participated in the study. Current patient safety policies identified were categorised across 5 thematic areas and initiatives were categorised across a further 10 thematic areas. Strengths of patient safety initiatives included enabling healthcare worker training, leadership commitment in hospitals, and stakeholder engagement and collaboration. Weaknesses included a disconnect between health delivery and education, implementation gaps, low clinical awareness and buy-in at the facility level, and lack of leadership engagement. Just culture, safety by design and education were considered opportunities, alongside data collection and reporting for research and shared learning. Future threats were low leadership commitment, changing leadership, poor integration across the system, a public-private quality gap and political instability in some contexts. Undertaking further research regionally will enable shared learning and the development of best practice examples. Future research should explore the development of policies and initiatives for patient safety at the provider, local and national levels that can inform action across the system.

Influence of external assessment on quality and safety in surgery: a qualitative study of surgeons' perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Transparency about the occurrence of adverse events has been a decades-long governmental priority, defining external feedback to healthcare providers as a key measure to improve the services and reduce the number of adverse events. This study aimed to explore surgeons' experiences of assessment by external bodies, with a focus on its impact on transparency, reporting and learning from serious adverse events. External bodies were defined as external inspection, police internal investigation, systems of patient injury compensation and media. METHODS: Based on a qualitative study design, 15 surgeons were recruited from four Norwegian university hospitals and examined with individual semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed by deductive content analysis. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were identified, related to influence of external inspection, police investigation, patient injury compensation and media publicity, (re)presented by three categories: (1) sense of criminalisation and reinforcement of guilt, being treated as suspects, (2) lack of knowledge and competence among external bodies causing and reinforcing a sense of clashing cultures between the 'medical and the outside world' with minor influence on quality improvement and (3) involving external bodies could stimulate awareness about internal issues of quality and safety, depending on relevant competence, knowledge and communication skills. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This study found that external assessment might generate criminalisation and scapegoating, reinforcing the sense of having medical perspectives on one hand and external regulatory perspectives on the other, which might hinder efforts to improve quality and safety. External bodies could, however, inspire useful adjustment of internal routines and procedures. The study implies that the variety and interconnections between external bodies may expose the surgeons to challenging pressure. Further studies are required to investigate these challenges to quality and safety in surgery.

Building a NICU quality & safety infrastructure.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Standards for Levels of Neonatal Care, published in 2023, highlights key components of a Neonatal Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Program (NPSQIP). A comprehensive Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) quality and safety infrastructure (QSI) is based on four foundational domains: quality improvement, quality assurance, safety culture, and clinical guidelines. This paper serves as an operational guide for NICU clinical leaders and quality champions to navigate these domains and develop their local QSI to include the AAP NPSQIP standards.

Ward-based in situ simulation: lessons learnt from a UK District General Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: In situ simulation (ISS) enables multiprofessional healthcare teams to train for real emergencies in their own working environment and identify latent patient safety threats. This study aimed to determine ISS impact on teamwork, technical skill performance, healthcare staff perception and latent error identification during simulated medical emergencies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Unannounced ISS sessions (n=14, n=75 staff members) using a high-fidelity mannequin were conducted in medical, paediatric and rehabilitation wards at Stepping Hill Hospital (Stockport National Health Service Foundation Trust, UK). Each session encompassed a 15 min simulation followed by a 15 min faculty-led debrief. RESULTS: The clinical team score revealed low overall teamwork performances during simulated medical emergencies (mean±SEM: 4.3±0.5). Linear regression analysis revealed that overall communication (r=0.9, p<0.001), decision-making (r=0.77, p<0.001) and overall situational awareness (r=0.73, p=0.003) were the strongest statistically significant predictors of overall teamwork performance. Neither the number of attending healthcare professionals, their professional background, age, gender, degree of clinical experience, level of resuscitation training or previous simulation experience statistically significantly impacted on overall teamwork performance. ISS positively impacted on healthcare staff confidence and clinical training. Identified safety threats included unknown location of intraosseous kits, poor/absent airway management, incomplete A-E assessments, inability to activate the major haemorrhage protocol, unknown location/dose of epinephrine for anaphylaxis management, delayed administration of epinephrine and delayed/absence of attachment of pads to the defibrillator as well as absence of accessing ALS algorithms, poor chest compressions and passive behaviour during simulated cardiac arrests. CONCLUSION: Poor demonstration of technical/non-technical skills mandate regular ISS interventions for healthcare professionals of all levels. ISS positively impacts on staff confidence and training and drives identification of latent errors enabling improvements in workplace systems and resources.

Associations between patient safety culture and workplace safety culture in hospital settings.

BACKGROUND: Strong cultures of workplace safety and patient safety are both critical for advancing safety in healthcare and eliminating harm to both the healthcare workforce and patients. However, there is currently minimal published empirical evidence about the relationship between the perceptions of providers and staff on workplace safety culture and patient safety culture. METHODS: This study examined cross-sectional relationships between the core Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Hospital Survey 2.0 patient safety culture measures and supplemental workplace safety culture measures. We used data from a pilot test in 2021 of the Workplace Safety Supplemental Item Set, which consisted of 6,684 respondents from 28 hospitals in 16 states. We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between the 11 patient safety culture measures and the 10 workplace safety culture measures. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (69) of 110 associations were statistically significant (mean standardized ß = 0.5; 0.58 < standardized ß < 0.95). The largest number of associations for the workplace safety culture measures with the patient safety culture measures were: (1) overall support from hospital leaders to ensure workplace safety; (2) being able to report workplace safety problems without negative consequences; and, (3) overall rating on workplace safety. The two associations with the strongest magnitude were between the overall rating on workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.95) and hospital management support for workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Study results provide evidence that workplace safety culture and patient safety culture are fundamentally linked and both are vital to a strong and healthy culture of safety.

Quality of care transition, patient safety incidents, and patients' health status: a structural equation model on the complexity of the discharge process.

BACKGROUND: The transition of patients between care contexts poses patient safety risks. Discharges to home from inpatient care can be associated with adverse patient outcomes. Quality in discharge processes is essential in ensuring safe transitions for patients. Current evidence relies on bivariate analyses and neglects contextual factors such as treatment and patient characteristics and the interactions of potential outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the associations between the quality and safety of the discharge process, patient safety incidents, and health-related outcomes after discharge, considering the treatments' and patients' contextual factors in one comprehensive model. METHODS: Patients at least 18 years old and discharged home after at least three days of inpatient treatment received a self-report questionnaire. A total of N = 825 patients participated. The assessment contained items to assess the quality and safety of the discharge process from the patient's perspective with the care transitions measure (CTM), a self-report on the incidence of unplanned readmissions and medication complications, health status, and sociodemographic and treatment-related characteristics. Statistical analyses included structural equation modeling (SEM) and additional analyses using logistic regressions. RESULTS: Higher quality of care transition was related to a lower incidence of medication complications (B = -0.35, p < 0.01) and better health status (B = 0.74, p < 0.001), but not with lower incidence of readmissions (B = -0.01, p = 0.39). These effects were controlled for the influences of various sociodemographic and treatment-related characteristics in SEM. Additional analyses showed that these associations were only constant when all subscales of the CTM were included. CONCLUSIONS: Quality and safety in the discharge process are critical to safe patient transitions to home care. This study contributes to a better understanding of the complex discharge process by applying a model in which various contextual factors and interactions were considered. The findings revealed that high quality discharge processes are associated with a lower likelihood of patient safety incidents and better health status at home even, when sociodemographic and treatment-related characteristics are taken into account. This study supports the call for developing individualized, patient-centered discharge processes to strengthen patient safety in care transitions.

Psychometric properties and criterion related validity of the Norwegian version of hospital survey on patient safety culture 2.0.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have been conducted with the 1.0 version of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) in Norway and globally. The 2.0 version has not been translated and tested in Norwegian hospital settings. This study aims to 1) assess the psychometrics of the Norwegian version (N-HSOPSC 2.0), and 2) assess the criterion validity of the N-HSOPSC 2.0, adding two more outcomes, namely 'pleasure of work' and 'turnover intention'. METHODS: The HSOPSC 2.0 was translated using a sequential translation process. A convenience sample was used, inviting hospital staff from two hospitals (N = 1002) to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire study. Data were analyzed using Mplus. The construct validity was tested with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Convergent validity was tested using Average Variance Explained (AVE), and internal consistency was tested with composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach's alpha. Criterion related validity was tested with multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The overall statistical results using the N-HSOPSC 2.0 indicate that the model fit based on CFA was acceptable. Five of the N-HSOPSC 2.0 dimensions had AVE scores below the 0.5 criterium. The CR criterium was meet on all dimensions except Teamwork (0.61). However, Teamwork was one of the most important and significant predictors of the outcomes. Regression models explained most variance related to patient safety rating (adjusted R2 = 0.38), followed by 'turnover intention' (adjusted R2 = 0.22), 'pleasure at work' (adjusted R2 = 0.14), and lastly, 'number of reported events' (adjusted R2=0.06). CONCLUSION: The N-HSOPSC 2.0 had acceptable construct validity and internal consistency when translated to Norwegian and tested among Norwegian staff in two hospitals. Hence, the instrument is appropriate for use in Norwegian hospital settings. The ten dimensions predicted most variance related to 'overall patient safety', and less related to 'number of reported events'. In addition, the safety culture dimensions predicted 'pleasure at work' and 'turnover intention', which is not part of the original instrument.

Guidelines in Practice: A Safe Environment of Care.

Creating a safe environment for performing surgical procedures is essential to achieve successful patient outcomes and protect the perioperative personnel who are providing care. Numerous factors challenge the provision of a safe environment of care and create a complex setting for perioperative nurses to manage. The updated AORN "Guideline for a safe environment of care" provides perioperative nurses with recommendations for establishing a safe environment for both patients and personnel. This article provides an overview of the guideline and discusses recommendations for implementing fire safety protocols, using warming cabinets, and creating a latex-safe environment. It also includes a scenario describing the care of a patient with an unidentified latex allergy who is undergoing a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and hiatal hernia repair. Perioperative nurses should review the guideline in its entirety and implement recommendations as applicable in operative and other procedural settings.

TeamSTEPPS improves patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Examine how Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) can be used to manage patient safety and improve the standard of care for patients. METHODS: In order to improve key medical training in areas like surgical safety management, blood transfusion closed-loop management, drug safety management and identity recognition, we apply the TeamSTEPPS teaching methodology. We then examine the effects of this implementation on changes in pertinent indicators. RESULTS: Our hospital's perioperative death rate dropped to 0.019%, unscheduled reoperations dropped to 0.11%, and defined daily doses fell to 24.85. Antibiotic usage among hospitalised patients declined to 40.59%, while the percentage of antibacterial medicine prescriptions for outpatient patients decreased to 13.26%. Identity recognition requirements were implemented at a rate of 94.5%, and the low-risk group's death rate dropped to 0.01%. Critical transfusion episodes were less common, with an incidence of 0.01%. The physician's TeamSTEPPS Teamwork Perceptions Questionnaire and Teamwork Attitudes Questionnaire scores dramatically improved following the TeamSTEPPS team instruction course. CONCLUSION: An evidence-based team collaboration training programme called TeamSTEPPS combines clinical practice with team collaboration skills to enhance team performance in the healthcare industry and raise standards for medical quality, safety, and effectiveness.

Systematic review on the frequency and quality of reporting patient and public involvement in patient safety research.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, patient and public involvement (PPI) in research has significantly increased; however, the reporting of PPI remains poor. The Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2) was developed to enhance the quality and consistency of PPI reporting. The objective of this systematic review is to identify the frequency and quality of PPI reporting in patient safety (PS) research using the GRIPP2 checklist. METHODS: Searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from 2018 to December, 2023. Studies on PPI in PS research were included. We included empirical qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, and case studies. Only articles published in peer-reviewed journals in English were included. The quality of PPI reporting was assessed using the short form of the (GRIPP2-SF) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 8561 studies were retrieved from database searches, updates, and reference checks, of which 82 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. Major PS topics were related to medication safety, general PS, and fall prevention. Patient representatives, advocates, patient advisory groups, patients, service users, and health consumers were the most involved. The main involvement across the studies was in commenting on or developing research materials. Only 6.1% (n = 5) of the studies reported PPI as per the GRIPP2 checklist. Regarding the quality of reporting following the GRIPP2-SF criteria, our findings show sub-optimal reporting mainly due to failures in: critically reflecting on PPI in the study; reporting the aim of PPI in the study; and reporting the extent to which PPI influenced the study overall. CONCLUSIONS: Our review shows a low frequency of PPI reporting in PS research using the GRIPP2 checklist. Furthermore, it reveals a sub-optimal quality in PPI reporting following GRIPP2-SF items. Researchers, funders, publishers, and journals need to promote consistent and transparent PPI reporting following internationally developed reporting guidelines such as the GRIPP2. Evidence-based guidelines for reporting PPI should be encouraged and supported as it helps future researchers to plan and report PPI more effectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023450715).