From Reporting to Improving: How Root Cause Analysis in Teams Shape Patient Safety Culture.

experience feedback committees morbidity and mortality conferences patient safety culture quality improvement programs

Journal

Risk management and healthcare policy
ISSN: 1179-1594
Titre abrégé: Risk Manag Healthc Policy
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101566264

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2024
Historique:
received: 01 03 2024
accepted: 10 07 2024
medline: 29 7 2024
pubmed: 29 7 2024
entrez: 29 7 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Given the increasing focus on patient safety in healthcare systems worldwide, understanding the impact of Continuous Quality Improvement Programs (QIPs) is crucial. QIPs, including Morbidity and Mortality Conferences (MMCs) and Experience Feedback Committees (EFCs), have been identified as effective strategies for enhancing patient safety culture. These programs engage healthcare professionals in the identification and analysis of adverse events to foster a culture of safety (ie the product of individual and group value, attitudes, and perceptions about quality and safety). This study aimed to determine whether patient safety culture differed regarding care provider participation in MMCs and EFCs activities. A cross-sectional web-only survey was conducted in 2022 using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) among 4780 employees at an 1836-bed, university-affiliated hospital in France. We quantified the mean differences in the 12 HSOPS dimension scores according to MMCs and EFCs participation, using Cohen d effect size. We performed a multivariate analysis of variance to examine differences in dimension scores after adjusting for background characteristics. Of 4780 eligible employees, 1457 (30.5%) participated in the study. Among the respondents, 571 (39.2%) participated in MMCs or EFCs activities. Participants engaged in MMCs or EFCs reported significantly higher scores in six out of twelve HSOPS dimensions, particularly in "Nonpunitive response to error", "Feedback and communication about error", and "Organizational learning" (Overall effect size = 0.14, 95% confidence interval = 0.11 to 0.17, P<0.001). Notably, involvement in both MMCs and EFCs was associated with higher improvements in patient safety culture compared to non-participation or singular involvement in either program. However, certain dimensions such as "Staffing", "Hospital management support", and "Hospital handoffs and transition" showed no significant association with MMCs or EFCs participation, highlighting broader systemic challenges. The study confirms the positive association between participation in MMCs or EFCs and an enhanced culture of patient safety, emphasizing the importance of such programs in fostering an environment conducive to learning, communication, and nonpunitive responses to errors. While MMCs or EFCs are effective in promoting certain aspects of patient safety culture, addressing broader systemic challenges remains crucial for comprehensive improvements in patient safety.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Given the increasing focus on patient safety in healthcare systems worldwide, understanding the impact of Continuous Quality Improvement Programs (QIPs) is crucial. QIPs, including Morbidity and Mortality Conferences (MMCs) and Experience Feedback Committees (EFCs), have been identified as effective strategies for enhancing patient safety culture. These programs engage healthcare professionals in the identification and analysis of adverse events to foster a culture of safety (ie the product of individual and group value, attitudes, and perceptions about quality and safety). This study aimed to determine whether patient safety culture differed regarding care provider participation in MMCs and EFCs activities.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A cross-sectional web-only survey was conducted in 2022 using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) among 4780 employees at an 1836-bed, university-affiliated hospital in France. We quantified the mean differences in the 12 HSOPS dimension scores according to MMCs and EFCs participation, using Cohen d effect size. We performed a multivariate analysis of variance to examine differences in dimension scores after adjusting for background characteristics.
Results UNASSIGNED
Of 4780 eligible employees, 1457 (30.5%) participated in the study. Among the respondents, 571 (39.2%) participated in MMCs or EFCs activities. Participants engaged in MMCs or EFCs reported significantly higher scores in six out of twelve HSOPS dimensions, particularly in "Nonpunitive response to error", "Feedback and communication about error", and "Organizational learning" (Overall effect size = 0.14, 95% confidence interval = 0.11 to 0.17, P<0.001). Notably, involvement in both MMCs and EFCs was associated with higher improvements in patient safety culture compared to non-participation or singular involvement in either program. However, certain dimensions such as "Staffing", "Hospital management support", and "Hospital handoffs and transition" showed no significant association with MMCs or EFCs participation, highlighting broader systemic challenges.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
The study confirms the positive association between participation in MMCs or EFCs and an enhanced culture of patient safety, emphasizing the importance of such programs in fostering an environment conducive to learning, communication, and nonpunitive responses to errors. While MMCs or EFCs are effective in promoting certain aspects of patient safety culture, addressing broader systemic challenges remains crucial for comprehensive improvements in patient safety.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39072187
doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S466852
pii: 466852
pmc: PMC11277907
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1847-1858

Informations de copyright

© 2024 Tsamasiotis et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Laurent Boyer reports honoraria/has been a consultant for Lundbeck, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Auteurs

Christos Tsamasiotis (C)

Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Grenoble-Alps University Hospital; Laboratory TIMC-IMAG, UMR 5525 Joint Research Unit, National Center for Scientific Research, Faculty of Medicine, Grenoble Alps University, Grenoble, France.

Gaelle Fiard (G)

Department of Urology, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.

Pierre Bouzat (P)

Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Grenoble, University Grenoble Alpes; INSERM U1216, Grenoble Institut Neurosciences, Grenoble, France.

Patrice François (P)

Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Grenoble-Alps University Hospital; Laboratory TIMC-IMAG, UMR 5525 Joint Research Unit, National Center for Scientific Research, Faculty of Medicine, Grenoble Alps University, Grenoble, France.

Guillaume Fond (G)

AP-HM, Aix-Marseille University, School of Medicine - La Timone Medical Campus, UR3279: Health Service Research and Quality of Life Center (CEReSS), Marseille, France.

Laurent Boyer (L)

AP-HM, Aix-Marseille University, School of Medicine - La Timone Medical Campus, UR3279: Health Service Research and Quality of Life Center (CEReSS), Marseille, France.

Bastien Boussat (B)

Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Grenoble-Alps University Hospital; Laboratory TIMC-IMAG, UMR 5525 Joint Research Unit, National Center for Scientific Research, Faculty of Medicine, Grenoble Alps University, Grenoble, France.
O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Classifications MeSH