Dataset Information

The characteristics of patient safety culture in Japan, Taiwan and the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Quality and safety issues are receiving growing attention. Patient safety culture (PSC) plays an important role in patient safety. The characteristics of PSC in various countries, each with a different set of values, have not been determined sufficiently. The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of PSC in Japan, Taiwan and the U.S.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Japan and Taiwan using the Hospital Survey on PSC (HSOPS) questionnaire developed by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Data from Japan and Taiwan were also compared with the U.S. "2010 HSOPS Comparative Database" provided by AHRQ.

Results

Valid response rates in Japan, Taiwan and the U.S. were 66.5% (6,963/10,466), 85.7% (10,019/11,692) and 35.2% (291,341/827,424), respectively. The proportion of respondents with some experience of event reporting during the past 12 months was highest in Japan. In general, U.S. healthcare workers were likely to evaluate their PSC higher than that in Japan or Taiwan. The attitude of continuous improvement in Japan and event reporting of near misses in Taiwan were rated as low. In the U.S., staffing was rated as high.

Conclusions

The results suggest that PSC varies among different countries, and the cultural setting of each country should be given special consideration in the development of effective intervention plans to improve PSC. Additional investigations with improved methodology and a common protocol are required to accurately compare PSCs among countries.

SUBMITTER: Fujita S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3626628 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The characteristics of patient safety culture in Japan, Taiwan and the United States.

Fujita Shigeru S Seto Kanako K Ito Shinya S Wu Yinghui Y Huang Chiu-Chin CC Hasegawa Tomonori T

BMC health services research 20130114

<h4>Background</h4>Quality and safety issues are receiving growing attention. Patient safety culture (PSC) plays an important role in patient safety. The characteristics of PSC in various countries, each with a different set of values, have not been determined sufficiently. The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of PSC in Japan, Taiwan and the U.S.<h4>Methods</h4>A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Japan and Taiwan using the Hospital Survey on PSC (HSOPS) questionnaire ...[more]

PMID: 23316872

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Volume metrics may have relevance in the evaluation of valve center expertise. However, a paucity of data exists regarding the quantity, volume, and geographic location of mitral valve (MV) surgical centers in the United States and the proportion of underserved populations they treat. Objectives:To evaluate the hospital, patient, and procedural characteristics of mitral valve repair or replacement (MVRR) in the United States as a function of hospital procedure volume. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional, multicenter observational study was conducted from July 2014 to June 2018. Patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database undergoing any surgical procedure involving MVRR in the United States were included. Main Outcomes and Measures:Volume distribution of MVRR by hospital and hospital referral region. Results:There were 165?405 MVRRs performed in 1082 centers during the study period, of which 86?488 (52.3%) were MV repairs. There were 575 centers (53.1%) that performed 25 or more MVRRs per year. The geographic distribution of centers performing 25 or more MVRRs per year differed from those performing fewer than 25 MVRRs per year. Of 304 designated hospital referral regions, 235 (77.3%) had at least 1 center performing 25 or more MVRRs per year, representing accessibility to 1 or more such centers for 296.4 million of 320.1 million US residents (92.6% of the US population; Midwest, 60.0 million of 68.0 million [88.4%]; South, 112.6 million of 122.6 million [91.9%]; West, 68.6 million of 72.9 million [94.1%]; and Northeast, 54.9 million of 56.6 million [97.1%]). Of 304 hospital referral regions, 168 (55.3%) had at least 1 center performing 40 or more MVRRs per year, representing accessibility to 1 or more such centers for 259.8 million of 317.90 million (81.7%) of the US population (Midwest, 50.5 million of 67.9 million [74.5%]; South, 94.5 million of 121.1 million [78.1%]; West, 64.0 million of 72.8 million [88.0%]; Northeast, 50.1 million of 56.3 million [90.2%]). More black and Hispanic patients received operations in centers performing 25 or more MVRRs per year (22?984) vs those performing fewer than 25 MVRRs per year (3227), yet the proportion was higher in lower-volume centers (22?984 of 148?385 [15.5%] vs 3227 of 17?020 [19.0%]; P?<?.001). In centers performing 25 or more MVRRs per year vs fewer than 25 MVRRs per year, there was a lower percentage of Medicare and Medicaid patients (47?920 of 148?385 [32.3%] vs 6183 of 17?020 [.3%]; P?<?.001) and patients from rural zip codes (21?208 of 148?385 [14.3%] vs 3146 of 17?020 [18.5%]; P?<?.001). Conclusions and Relevance:Fifty-three percent of all centers performed 25 or more MVRRs per year, and 92.6% of the US population lived in an hospital referral region with at least 1 such center. Disparities in race/ethnicity, rurality, and insurance status exist among patients being treated at centers with different volumes. These data indicate that efforts to centralize care based on volume metrics will need to balance access vs quality.

Project description:BackgroundThe American College of Surgeons delineates 108 requirements for level I trauma centers. Some of these requirements include: minimum of 1,200 trauma admissions per year; an average of 35 major trauma patients per surgeon; residency training programs; and 10 peer-reviewed journal submissions every three years. This study examines the variation in services provided among U.S. level I trauma centers.Methods218 facilities identified as level I trauma centers in 2005 were contacted for participation. 136 centers in 37 states completed the questionnaire. Surveys queried variances in trauma, neurosurgery, plastics, and orthopaedic surgery with regard to type of center, type of accreditation, number and training of participating physicians, number of beds, dedicated OR support (staff/rooms), call pay, and research.ResultsOf the level I centers surveyed, 66% are university-affiliated facilities that employ more surgeons and staffing across trauma and all subspecialties compared to community-based or public centers. However, the community and public centers have more surgeons per capita (44% of the university-affiliated hospitals have six or more trauma surgeons on staff compared to 59% of the community and 70% of the public facilities). University-affiliated centers also provide more in-house subspecialty services (orthopaedic, neurosurgery, and plastics). Thirty-nine percent do not have ACS accreditation and are designated trauma facilities by state or local governments. Only 49% of trauma centers provide on-call pay to trauma surgeons, and these percentages decline for all subspecialties. Dedicated operating rooms and research programs are also lacking among all subspecialties.ConclusionBased on our findings, we conclude that there are no homogeneous criteria for being accredited as a level I trauma center. Reliable resources should be offered at any facility that claims a level I trauma designation. We do not know if such diversity of services truly impacts care or how it can be measured; nevertheless, it would be logical to presume that at some point services that fall below a minimum threshold would potentially adversely affect the quality of care. In order to develop appropriate policy to decrease possible disparities, differentiation in services between trauma centers must be further researched and described.

Project description:BackgroundSafety activities have been initiated at many hospitals in Taiwan, but little is known about the safety culture at these hospitals. The aims of this study were to verify a safety culture survey instrument in Chinese and to assess hospital safety culture in Taiwan.MethodsThe Taiwan Patient Safety Culture Survey was conducted in 2008, using the adapted Safety Attitude Questionnaire in Chinese (SAQ-C). Hospitals and their healthcare workers participated in the survey on a voluntary basis. The psychometric properties of the five SAQ-C dimensions were examined, including teamwork climate, safety climate, job satisfaction, perception of management, and working conditions. Additional safety measures were asked to assess healthcare workers' attitudes toward their collaboration with nurses, physicians, and pharmacists, respectively, and perceptions of hospitals' encouragement of safety reporting, safety training, and delivery delays due to communication breakdowns in clinical areas. The associations between the respondents' attitudes to each SAQ-C dimension and safety measures were analyzed by generalized estimating equations, adjusting for the clustering effects at hospital levels.ResultsA total of 45,242 valid questionnaires were returned from 200 hospitals with a mean response rate of 69.4%. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.792 for teamwork climate, 0.816 for safety climate, 0.912 for job satisfaction, 0.874 for perception of management, and 0.785 for working conditions. Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated a good model fit for each dimension and the entire construct. The percentage of hospital healthcare workers holding positive attitude was 48.9% for teamwork climate, 45.2% for perception of management, 42.1% for job satisfaction, 37.2% for safety climate, and 31.8% for working conditions. There were wide variations in the range of SAQ-C scores in each dimension among hospitals. Compared to those without positive attitudes, healthcare workers with positive attitudes to each SAQ dimension were more likely to perceive good collaboration with coworkers, and their hospitals were more likely to encourage safety reporting and to prioritize safety training programs (Wald chi-square test, p < 0.001 for all).ConclusionsAnalytical results verified the psychometric properties of the SAQ-C at Taiwanese hospitals. The safety culture at most hospitals has not fully developed and there is considerable room for improvement.

Dataset Information

The characteristics of patient safety culture in Japan, Taiwan and the United States.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The characteristics of patient safety culture in Japan, Taiwan and the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets