BACKGROUND: The experience feedback committee (EFC) is a tool designed to involve medical teams in patient safety management, through root cause analysis within the team. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether patient safety culture, as measured by the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS), differed regarding care provider involvement in EFC activities. METHODS: Using the original data from a cross-sectional survey of 5064 employees at a single university hospital in France, we analyzed the differences in HSOPS dimension scores according involvement in EFC activities. RESULTS: Of 5064 eligible employees, 3888 (76.8%) participated in the study. Among the respondents, 440 (11.3%) participated in EFC activities. Experience feedback committee participants had a more developed patient safety culture, with 9 of the 12 HSOPS dimension scores significantly higher than EFC nonparticipants (overall effect size = 0.31, 95% confidence interval = 0.21 to 0.41, P < 0.001). A multivariate analysis of variance indicated that all 12 dimension scores, taken together, were significantly different between EFC participants and nonparticipants (P < 0.0001), independently of sex, hospital department, and healthcare profession category. The largest differences in scores related to the "feedback and communication about error," "organizational learning," and "Nonpunitive response to error" dimensions. The analysis of the subgroup of professionals who worked in a department with a productive EFC, defined as an EFC implementing at least five actions per year, showed a higher patient safety culture level for seven of the 12 HSOPS dimensions (overall effect size = 0.19, 95% confidence interval = 0.10 to 0.27, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Participation in EFC activities was associated with higher patient safety culture scores. The findings suggest that root cause analysis in the team's routine may improve patient safety culture.
BACKGROUND: The experience feedback committee (EFC) is a tool designed to involve medical teams in patient safety management, through root cause analysis within the team. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether patient safety culture, as measured by the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS), differed regarding care provider involvement in EFC activities. METHODS: Using the original data from a cross-sectional survey of 5064 employees at a single university hospital in France, we analyzed the differences in HSOPS dimension scores according involvement in EFC activities. RESULTS: Of 5064 eligible employees, 3888 (76.8%) participated in the study. Among the respondents, 440 (11.3%) participated in EFC activities. Experience feedback committee participants had a more developed patient safety culture, with 9 of the 12 HSOPS dimension scores significantly higher than EFC nonparticipants (overall effect size = 0.31, 95% confidence interval = 0.21 to 0.41, P < 0.001). A multivariate analysis of variance indicated that all 12 dimension scores, taken together, were significantly different between EFC participants and nonparticipants (P < 0.0001), independently of sex, hospital department, and healthcare profession category. The largest differences in scores related to the "feedback and communication about error," "organizational learning," and "Nonpunitive response to error" dimensions. The analysis of the subgroup of professionals who worked in a department with a productive EFC, defined as an EFC implementing at least five actions per year, showed a higher patient safety culture level for seven of the 12 HSOPS dimensions (overall effect size = 0.19, 95% confidence interval = 0.10 to 0.27, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Participation in EFC activities was associated with higher patient safety culture scores. The findings suggest that root cause analysis in the team's routine may improve patient safety culture.
Authors: Jimmy Martin-Delgado; Alba Martínez-García; Jesús María Aranaz; José L Valencia-Martín; José Joaquín Mira Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 1.927