Solvejg Kristensen1, Antje Hammer2, Paul Bartels3, Rosa Suñol4, Oliver Groene5, Caroline A Thompson6, Onyebuchi A Arah7, Halina Kutaj-Wasikowska8, Philippe Michel9, Cordula Wagner10. 1. Central Denmark Region and Department of Clinical Medicine, Danish Clinical Registries, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 2. Institute for Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, Faculty of Human Science and Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Köln, Germany. 3. Danish Clinical Registries, Central Denmark Region and Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 4. Avedis Donabedian University Institute, Universitat Atonoma de Barcelona, Red de Investigación en Servicios de Salud en Enfermedadescrónicas (REDISSEC), Barcelona, Spain. 5. Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 7. Department of Epidemiology, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 8. Polish Society for Quality Promotion in Health Care, Kraków, Poland. 9. Quality and Patient Safety Department, University Hospital of Lyon, Lyon, France. 10. Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the associations of quality management systems with teamwork and safety climate, and to describe and compare differences in perceptions of teamwork climate and safety climate among clinical leaders and frontline clinicians. METHOD: We used a multi-method, cross-sectional approach to collect survey data of quality management systems and perceived teamwork and safety climate. Our data analyses included descriptive and multilevel regression methods. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data on implementation of quality management system from seven European countries were evaluated including patient safety culture surveys from 3622 clinical leaders and 4903 frontline clinicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived teamwork and safety climate. RESULTS: Teamwork climate was reported as positive by 67% of clinical leaders and 43% of frontline clinicians. Safety climate was perceived as positive by 54% of clinical leaders and 32% of frontline clinicians. We found positive associations between implementation of quality management systems and teamwork and safety climate. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, which should be placed in a broader clinical quality improvement context, point to the importance of quality management systems as a supportive structural feature for promoting teamwork and safety climate. To gain a deeper understanding of this association, further qualitative and quantitative studies using longitudinally collected data are recommended. The study also confirms that more clinical leaders than frontline clinicians have a positive perception of teamwork and safety climate. Such differences should be accounted for in daily clinical practice and when tailoring initiatives to improve teamwork and safety climate.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the associations of quality management systems with teamwork and safety climate, and to describe and compare differences in perceptions of teamwork climate and safety climate among clinical leaders and frontline clinicians. METHOD: We used a multi-method, cross-sectional approach to collect survey data of quality management systems and perceived teamwork and safety climate. Our data analyses included descriptive and multilevel regression methods. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data on implementation of quality management system from seven European countries were evaluated including patient safety culture surveys from 3622 clinical leaders and 4903 frontline clinicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived teamwork and safety climate. RESULTS: Teamwork climate was reported as positive by 67% of clinical leaders and 43% of frontline clinicians. Safety climate was perceived as positive by 54% of clinical leaders and 32% of frontline clinicians. We found positive associations between implementation of quality management systems and teamwork and safety climate. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, which should be placed in a broader clinical quality improvement context, point to the importance of quality management systems as a supportive structural feature for promoting teamwork and safety climate. To gain a deeper understanding of this association, further qualitative and quantitative studies using longitudinally collected data are recommended. The study also confirms that more clinical leaders than frontline clinicians have a positive perception of teamwork and safety climate. Such differences should be accounted for in daily clinical practice and when tailoring initiatives to improve teamwork and safety climate.
Authors: Gepke L Veenstra; Kees Ahaus; Gera A Welker; Erik Heineman; Maarten J van der Laan; Friso L H Muntinghe Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Solvejg Kristensen; Naina Túgvustein; Hjørdis Zachariassen; Svend Sabroe; Paul Bartels; Jan Mainz Journal: Drug Healthc Patient Saf Date: 2016-04-26