Dataset Information

'Not another safety culture survey': using the Canadian patient safety climate survey (Can-PSCS) to measure provider perceptions of PSC across health settings.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The importance of a strong safety culture for enhancing patient safety has been stated for over a decade in healthcare. However, this complex construct continues to face definitional and measurement challenges. Continuing improvements in the measurement of this construct are necessary for enhancing the utility of patient safety climate surveys (PSCS) in research and in practice. This study examines the revised Canadian PSCS (Can-PSCS) for use across a range of care settings. METHODS: Confirmatory factor analytical approaches are used to extensively test the Can-PSCS. Initial and cross-validation samples include 13 126 and 6324 direct care providers from 119 and 35 health settings across Canada, respectively. RESULTS: Results support a parsimonious model of direct care provider perceptions of patient safety climate (PSC) with 19 items in six dimensions: (1) organisational leadership support for safety; (2) incident follow-up; (3) supervisory leadership for safety; (4) unit learning culture; (5) enabling open communication I: judgement-free environment; (6) enabling open communication II: job repercussions of error. Results also support the validity of the Can-PSCS across a range of care settings. CONCLUSIONS: The Can-PSCS has several advantages: (1) it is a theory-based instrument with a small number of actionable dimensions central to the construct of PSC; (2) it has robust psychometric properties; (3) it is validated for use across a range of care settings, therefore suitable for use in regionalised health delivery systems and can help to raise expectations about acceptable levels of PSC across the system; (4) it has been tested in a publicly funded universal health insurance system and may be suitable for similar international systems.

SUBMITTER: Ginsburg LR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3913119 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

'Not another safety culture survey': using the Canadian patient safety climate survey (Can-PSCS) to measure provider perceptions of PSC across health settings.

Ginsburg Liane R LR Tregunno Deborah D Norton Peter G PG Mitchell Jonathan I JI Howley Heather H

BMJ quality & safety 20131011 2

<h4>Background</h4>The importance of a strong safety culture for enhancing patient safety has been stated for over a decade in healthcare. However, this complex construct continues to face definitional and measurement challenges. Continuing improvements in the measurement of this construct are necessary for enhancing the utility of patient safety climate surveys (PSCS) in research and in practice. This study examines the revised Canadian PSCS (Can-PSCS) for use across a range of care settings.<h ...[more]

PMID: 24122954

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSubstantial changes in abortion care regulations, available medications and national clinical practice guidelines have occurred since a 2012 national Canadian Abortion Provider Survey (CAPS). We developed and piloted the CAPS 2019 survey instrument to explore changes of the abortion provider workforce, their clinical care as well as experiences with stigma and harassment.MethodsWe undertook development and piloting in three phases: (1) development of the preliminary survey sections and questions based on the 2012 survey instrument, (2) content validation and feasibility of including certain content aspects via a modified Delphi Method with panels of clinical and research experts, and (3) pilot testing of the draft survey for face validity and clarity of language; assessing usability of the web-based Research Electronic Data Capture platform including the feasibility of complex skip pattern functionality. We performed content analysis of phase 2 results and used a general inductive approach to identify necessary survey modifications.ResultsIn phase 1, we generated a survey draft that reflected the changes in Canadian abortion care regulations and guidelines and included questions for clinicians and administrators providing first and second trimester surgical and medical abortion. In phase 2, we held 6 expert panel meetings of 5-8 participants each representing clinicians, administrators and researchers to provide feedback on the initial survey draft. Due to the complexity of certain identified aspects, such as interdisciplinary collaboration and interprovincial care delivery differences, we revised the survey sections through an iterative process of meetings and revisions until we reached consensus on constructs and questions to include versus exclude for not being feasible. In phase 3, we made minor revisions based on pilot testing of the bilingual, web-based survey among additional experts chosen to be widely representative of the study population. Demonstrating its feasibility, we included complex branching and skip pattern logic so each respondent only viewed applicable questions based on their prior responses.ConclusionsWe developed and piloted the CAPS 2019 survey instrument suitable to explore characteristics of a complex multidisciplinary workforce, their care and experience with stigma on a national level, and that can be adapted to other countries.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality (VR), a simulated experience that can be similar to or completely different from the real world, has become increasingly useful within the psychiatric and medical fields. This VR technology has been applied in medical school trainings, exposure therapy for individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and reminiscence therapy associated with mood disorders for older adults. Perceptions of VR through the lens of the health care provider require further exploration. VR has grown in popularity; however, this modality continues to be underused in most Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals.ObjectiveA web-based survey was used to explore health care provider perceptions of immersive VR availability and use for older adults and identify potential barriers for immersive VR use in older adults with cognitive impairment.MethodsAn 8-item web-based survey was developed to obtain health care provider feedback. This survey was disseminated throughout a single Veterans Integrated Services Network (VISN). The VR survey was developed via the Survey Monkey platform and distributed through the secure VA email network. Providers were asked to voluntarily participate in the brief, anonymous survey and offer their perceptions of immersive VR use within their patient population. Survey data were reviewed and interpreted using descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 49 respondents completed the survey over a 15-day period. Of them, 36 respondents (73%) had heard of a VR device, though the majority (n=44, 90%) had never used or prescribed a VR device. Respondents identified several potential barriers to immersive VR use in older adults with cognitive impairment (eg, hearing difficulties, perceptions of technology, cognitive concerns, access to resources, and visual impairment). Despite the barriers identified, providers (n=48, 98%) still reported that they would feel comfortable prescribing immersive VR as an intervention for their patient population.ConclusionsSurvey findings revealed that health care providers within this VISN for VAs have heard of VR, although they may not have actively engaged in its use. Most of the providers reported that they would prescribe the use of an immersive VR intervention for their older adult patients. This key point highlights the desire to implement VR strategies for patient use by their providers. If underlying barriers can be addressed and relatively resolved, this technological intervention has the potential to create substantial breakthroughs in clinical care.

Project description:The stages of biological development are not clearly defined despite the fact that they have been used to refer to concepts such as adolescence and aging. This study aimed to (1) propose and test a framework to search for stages of representative components and determine stages of stability and transition, (2) identify stages of biological development based on health questionnaire and biomarker data, and (3) interpret the major trajectories in a health and biomarker database.This study analyzed the data on the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) interviewees from cycle 1 to 3 (2007-2013) in Canada. We selected 282 variables containing information from questionnaire and on biomarkers after removing redundant variables based on high correlation. Fifty-nine nominal variables were replaced by 122 binominal variables, leaving 345 variables for analysis. Principal component (PC) analysis was conducted to summarize the data and the loadings were used to interpret the PCs. A stable stage was assumed to be the age groups without significantly different values of PCs.The CHMS interviewed 16,340 Canadians. Of all, 51.25% were female. The age ranged from 6 to 79?years (mean?=?34.41?years, 95% CI?=?34.74-34.08). The proportions of total variance explained by the first three PCs were 12.14, 4.03, and 3.19%, respectively. The differences of the first PC were not significant, especially between age 22 and 33, 34 and 40, 41 and 45, 46 and 71, and 72 and 79?years (adjusted p?>?0.05 for all). The leading variable, in terms of the variance contributed to PC1, was time spent in physical activities, followed by variables related to alcohol consumption, and smoking. The 13 leading contributors to PC2 variances were all lung function measures.There are stages of stability and transition across all age groups based on the first PCs. The first and second PCs are related to physical development and lung function. The identification of stable stages is the first step to understanding how human biology develops in a population perspective and will be important for research that relies on a research population with similar characteristics to draw samples for observation or intervention.

Project description:BackgroundPatient safety is a worldwide problem, and the patient contribution to mitigate the risk of patient harm is now recognized as a cornerstone to its solution. In order to understand the nature of integrating patients into patient safety and healthcare organizations and to monitor their integration, a Canadian survey tool has been co-constructed by patients, researchers and the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI). This questionnaire has been adapted from the French version of the patient engagement (PE) in patient safety (PS) questionnaire created for the province of Quebec, Canada.MethodologyThe pan-Canadian PE in PS survey tool was developed in a five-step process: (1) a literature review and revision of the initial tool developed in the province of Quebec; (2) translation of the French questionnaire into an English version tool; (3) creation of a Canadian expert advisory group; (4) adaptation of the English version tool based on feedback from the expert advisory group (assessment and development of the construct's dimensions, wording assessment and adaptation for pan-Canadian use, technical testing of the online platform for the survey); and (5) pilot testing and pre-validation of the tool before pan-Canadian use.Results and conclusionEight pan-Canadian PE in PS surveys were completed from five Canadian provinces by the expert advisory group and six surveys were completed during the pilot project by participants from different provinces in Canada. This survey tool comprises 5 sections: (1) demographic identification of the participants (Q1 to Q5); (2) general questions (Q6 to Q17); (3) the patient engagement process (experience level of participants and organizational incentives for PE in general) (Q18 to Q33); (4) PE in PS processes, such as current activities, strategies, structures, resources and factors (Q34 to Q67); and (5) the context and impact of PE in PS initiatives in Canadian healthcare organizations (CHOs) (Q68 to Q75), including outcome identification, improvement mechanisms and strategies, evaluation mechanisms, and indicators.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary care providers (PCPs) are typically the first to screen and evaluate patients for neurocognitive disorders (NCDs), including mild cognitive impairment and dementia. However, data on PCP attitudes and evaluation and management practices are sparse. Our objective was to quantify perspectives and behaviors of PCPs and neurologists with respect to NCD evaluation and management. METHODS:A cross-sectional survey with 150 PCPs and 50 neurologists in the United States who evaluated more than 10 patients over age 55 per month. The 51-item survey assessed clinical practice characteristics, and confidence, perceived barriers, and typical practices when diagnosing and managing patients with NCDs. RESULTS:PCPs and neurologists reported similar confidence and approaches to general medical care and laboratory testing. Though over half of PCPs performed cognitive screening or referred patients for cognitive testing in over 50% of their patients, only 20% reported high confidence in interpreting results of cognitive tests. PCPs were more likely to order CT scans than MRIs, and only 14% of PCPs reported high confidence interpreting brain imaging findings, compared to 70% of specialists. Only 21% of PCPs were highly confident that they correctly recognized when a patient had an NCD, and only 13% were highly confident in making a specific NCD diagnosis (compared to 72 and 44% for neurologists, both p < 0.001). A quarter of all providers identified lack of familiarity with diagnostic criteria for NCD syndromes as a barrier to clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates how PCPs approach diagnosis and management of patients with NCDs, and identified areas for improvement in regards to cognitive testing and neuroimaging. This study also identified all providers' lack of familiarity with published diagnostic criteria for NCD syndromes. These findings may inform the development of new policies and interventions to help providers improve the efficacy of their decision processes and deliver better quality care to patients with NCDs.

Project description:BackgroundSystemic mastocytosis (SM) is a rare clonal neoplasm driven by the KIT D816V mutation and has a broad range of debilitating symptoms. In this study, the authors evaluated SM disease perceptions and management strategies among US health care providers (HCPs).MethodsHematologist/oncologist (H/O) HCPs and allergist/immunologist (A/I) HCPs who were treating four or more patients with SM completed an online, 51-item TouchStone HCP Survey, which queried provider characteristics, perceptions of disease burden, and current management. Descriptive analyses by specialty and SM subtype were performed.ResultsOf 304 HCPs contacted, 111 (37%) met eligibility criteria, including 51% A/I specialists and 49% H/O specialists. On average, the HCPs had 14 years of practice experience and cared for 20 patients with SM. A/I HCPs saw more patients with nonadvanced SM (78%) compared with H/O HCPs, who saw similar proportions of patients with nonadvanced SM (54%) and advanced SM (46%). HCPs reported testing 75% of patients for the KIT D816V mutation and found an estimated prevalence of 47%. On average, HCPs estimated 8 months between symptom onset and SM diagnosis. HCPs reported that 62% of patients with indolent SM felt depressed or discouraged because of symptoms. In terms of treatment goals for SM, both types of specialists prioritized symptom improvement for nonadvanced SM and improved survival for advanced SM while also prioritizing improving patient quality of life.ConclusionsBoth A/I and H/O specialists highlighted unmet needs for patients with SM. The HCPs surveyed reported a lower rate of KIT D816V mutations and a perceived shorter time between symptom onset and SM diagnosis compared with published estimates.Lay summarySpecialists treating systemic mastocytosis (SM) completed a 51-item questionnaire about their clinical practices and perceptions of disease impact. The study included 111 hematology, oncology, allergy, and immunology physicians. Physicians reported that most patients had nonadvanced disease, yet SM symptoms significantly disrupted their patients' lives. Physicians estimated that SM is diagnosed within months of symptom onset, in contrast with published reports of years' long delays reported by patients with SM. This study identified unmet needs that can inform educational and patient management priorities in this rare disease.

Dataset Information

'Not another safety culture survey': using the Canadian patient safety climate survey (Can-PSCS) to measure provider perceptions of PSC across health settings.

Publications

'Not another safety culture survey': using the Canadian patient safety climate survey (Can-PSCS) to measure provider perceptions of PSC across health settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets