Carmen Tereanu1, Scott A Smith2, Giuseppe Sampietro3, Francesco Sarnataro1, Giuliana Mazzoleni4, Bruno Pesenti1, Luca C Sala5, Roberto Cecchetti6, Massimo Arvati7, Dania Brioschi8, Michela Viscardi6, Chiara Prati7, Giorgio G Barbaglio9. 1. Department of Hygiene and Prevention, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute, Via Borgo Palazzo n. 130, 24125 Bergamo, Italy. 2. Westat, Rockville, 1600 Research Blvd., RB 1194 Rockville, MD 20850, USA. 3. Epidemiology Service, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute, Via Francesco Gallicciolli 4, 24121 Bergamo, Italy. 4. Azienda Socio-Sanitaria Territoriale, Bergamo Est, Via Paderno 21, 24068 Seriate, Italy. 5. Department of Prevention, Local Health Authority, Via don Sturzo 20, 13900 Biella, Italy. 6. Department of Medical Prevention, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute della Brianza, Viale Elvetia 2, 20900 Monza, Italy. 7. Department of Medical Prevention, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute della Val Padana, Via dei Toscani 1, 46100 Mantova, Italy. 8. Department of Teaching and Communication, Local Health Authority, Via don Sturzo 20, 13900 Biella, Italy. 9. Medical Management, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute, Via Francesco Gallicciolli 4, 24121 Bergamo, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) was designed to assess staff views on patient safety culture in hospital. This study examines psychometrics of the Italian translation of the HSOPS for use in territorial prevention facilities. DESIGN: After minimal adjustments and pre-test of the Italian version, a qualitative cross-sectional study was carried out. SETTING: Departments of Prevention (DPs) of four Local Health Authorities in Northern Italy. PARTICIPANTS: Census of medical and non-medical staff (n. 479). INTERVENTION: Web-based self-administered questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics, internal reliability, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and intercorrelations among survey composites. RESULTS: Initial CFA of the 12 patient safety culture composites and 42 items included in the original version of the questionnaire revealed that two dimensions (Staffing and Overall Perception of Patient Safety) and nine individual items did not perform well among Italian territorial Prevention staff. After dropping those composites and items, psychometric properties were acceptable (comparative fit index = 0.94; root mean square error of approximation = 0.04; standardized root mean square residual = 0.04). Internal consistency for each remaining composite met or exceeded the criterion 0.70. Intercorrelations were all statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analyses provided overall support for 10 of the 12 initial patient safety culture composites and 33 of the 42 initial composite items. Although the original instrument was intended for US Hospitals, the Italian translation of the HSOPS adapted for use in territorial prevention facilities performed adequately in Italian DPs.
OBJECTIVE: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) was designed to assess staff views on patient safety culture in hospital. This study examines psychometrics of the Italian translation of the HSOPS for use in territorial prevention facilities. DESIGN: After minimal adjustments and pre-test of the Italian version, a qualitative cross-sectional study was carried out. SETTING: Departments of Prevention (DPs) of four Local Health Authorities in Northern Italy. PARTICIPANTS: Census of medical and non-medical staff (n. 479). INTERVENTION: Web-based self-administered questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics, internal reliability, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and intercorrelations among survey composites. RESULTS: Initial CFA of the 12 patient safety culture composites and 42 items included in the original version of the questionnaire revealed that two dimensions (Staffing and Overall Perception of Patient Safety) and nine individual items did not perform well among Italian territorial Prevention staff. After dropping those composites and items, psychometric properties were acceptable (comparative fit index = 0.94; root mean square error of approximation = 0.04; standardized root mean square residual = 0.04). Internal consistency for each remaining composite met or exceeded the criterion 0.70. Intercorrelations were all statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analyses provided overall support for 10 of the 12 initial patient safety culture composites and 33 of the 42 initial composite items. Although the original instrument was intended for US Hospitals, the Italian translation of the HSOPS adapted for use in territorial prevention facilities performed adequately in Italian DPs.
Authors: Giuseppe Davide Albano; Arianna Rifiorito; Ginevra Malta; Erika Serena Sorrentino; Vincenzo Falco; Alberto Firenze; Antonina Argo; Stefania Zerbo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: C Tereanu; G Sampietro; F Sarnataro; G Mazzoleni; B Pesenti; L C Sala; R Cecchetti; M Arvati; D Brioschi; M Viscardi; C Prati; G Sala; G G Barbaglio Journal: J Prev Med Hyg Date: 2017-06
Authors: Jose Andres Calvache; Edison Benavides; Sebastian Echeverry; Francisco Agredo; Robert Jan Stolker; Markus Klimek Journal: J Patient Saf Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 2.243