Literature DB >> 29186417

Examining influences on speaking up among critical care healthcare providers in the United Arab Emirates.

Hanan H Edrees1,2,3, Mohd Nasir Mohd Ismail2, Bernadette Kelly4, Christine A Goeschel2,5,6, Sean M Berenholtz1,2,5, Peter J Pronovost1,2,5, Ali Abdul Kareem Al Obaidli4, Sallie J Weaver2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Assess perceived barriers to speaking up and to provide recommendations for reducing barriers to reporting adverse events and near misses. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTION: A six-item survey was administered to critical care providers in 19 Intensive Care Units in Abu Dhabi as part of an organizational safety and quality improvement effort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questions elicited perspectives about influences on reporting, perceived barriers and recommendations for conveying patient safety as an organizational priority. Qualitative thematic analyses were conducted for open-ended questions.
RESULTS: A total of 1171 participants were invited to complete the survey and 639 responded (response rate = 54.6%). Compared to other stakeholders (e.g. the media, public), a larger proportion of respondents 'agreed/strongly agreed' that corporate health system leadership and the health regulatory authority encouraged and supported error reporting (83%; 75%), and had the most influence on their decisions to report (81%; 74%). 29.5% of respondents cited fear of repercussion as a barrier, and 21.3% of respondents indicated no barriers to reporting. Barriers included perceptions of a culture of blame and issues with reporting procedures. Recommendations to establish patient safety as an organizational priority included creating supportive environments to discuss errors, hiring staff to advocate for patient safety, and implementing policies to standardize clinical practices and streamline reporting procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: Influences on reporting perceived by providers in the UAE were similar to those in the US and other countries. These findings highlight the roles of corporate leadership and regulators in developing non-punitive environments where reporting is a valuable and safe activity.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

Entities:  

Keywords:  adverse events; patient safety; qualitative research; safety climate; safety culture

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29186417     DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx144

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care        ISSN: 1353-4505            Impact factor:   2.038


  3 in total

1.  "A debriefer must be neutral" and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing.

Authors:  Julia Carolin Seelandt; Katie Walker; Michaela Kolbe
Journal:  Adv Simul (Lond)       Date:  2021-03-04

Review 2.  Enhancing psychological safety in mental health services.

Authors:  D F Hunt; J Bailey; B R Lennox; M Crofts; C Vincent
Journal:  Int J Ment Health Syst       Date:  2021-04-14

3.  The presence and potential impact of psychological safety in the healthcare setting: an evidence synthesis.

Authors:  K E Grailey; E Murray; T Reader; S J Brett
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 2.655

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.