Difference in prioritization of patient safety interventions between experts and patient safety managers in Japan

被引:1
|
作者
Hayashi, Ryosuke [1 ]
Hatakeyama, Yosuke [2 ]
Onishi, Ryo [2 ]
Seto, Kanako [2 ]
Matsumoto, Kunichika [2 ]
Hasegawa, Tomonori [2 ]
Mohammed, Jibril
机构
[1] Toho Univ, Grad Sch Med, Tokyo, Japan
[2] Toho Univ, Dept Social Med, Sch Med, Tokyo, Japan
来源
PLOS ONE | 2023年 / 18卷 / 03期
关键词
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0280475
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Although a variety of patient safety interventions have been implemented, prioritizing them in a limited resource environment is important. The intervention priorities of patient safety managers may differ from those of patient safety experts. This study aimed to clarify the difference in prioritization of interventions between experts and safety managers to better identify interventions that should be promoted in Japan. We performed a secondary data analysis of two surveys: the Delphi survey for Japanese experts and a nationwide questionnaire survey for safety managers in hospitals. Regarding the 32 interventions constituting 14 organizational-level and 18 clinical-level interventions examined in the previous studies, we assessed three correlations to examine the difference in prioritization between experts and safety managers: correlations between experts and safety managers in the three perspectives (contribution, dissemination, and priority), those between priorities of experts and safety managers at the clinical and organizational level, and those among the three perspectives in experts and safety managers. Contribution (r = 0.768) and dissemination (r = 0.689) of patient safety interventions evaluated by experts and safety managers were positively correlated, but priorities were not. Interventions with priorities that differed between experts and safety managers were identified. In experts, there was no significant correlation between contribution and priority or between dissemination and priority. For safety managers, contributions (r = 0.812) and dissemination (r = 0.691) were positively correlated with priority. Our results suggest that patient safety managers evaluated future priority based on past contributions and current dissemination, whereas experts evaluated future priority based on other factors, such as expected impacts in the future, as mentioned in the previous study. In health policymaking, promotion of patient safety interventions that were given high priority by experts, but low priority by safety managers, should be considered with possible incentives.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] PATIENT SAFETY Patient safety without the blame game
    Svansoe, Vibeke Lyngklip
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 347
  • [42] Profiles in patient safety: Organizational barriers to patient safety
    Perry, SJ
    [J]. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2002, 9 (08) : 848 - 850
  • [43] Do Patient Safety Indicators measure patient safety?
    Isaac, T.
    Jha, A. K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2007, 22 : 123 - 123
  • [44] Role of Patient Safety Organizations in Improving Patient Safety
    Boulanger, Jason
    Keohane, Carol
    Yeats, Ashley
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2019, 46 (02) : 257 - +
  • [45] The relationship between patient safety culture and the implementation of organizational patient safety defences at emergency departments
    van Noord, Inge
    de Bruijne, Martine C.
    Twisk, Jos W. R.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 2010, 22 (03) : 162 - 169
  • [46] The Relationship Between the Learning and Patient Safety Climates of Clinical Departments and Residents' Patient Safety Behaviors
    Silkens, Milou E. W. M.
    Arah, Onyebuchi A.
    Wagner, Cordula
    Scherpbier, Albert J. J. A.
    Heineman, Maas Jan
    Lombarts, Kiki M. J. M. H.
    [J]. ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2018, 93 (09) : 1374 - 1380
  • [47] Patient safety - Dial it for safety
    Scalise, D
    [J]. HOSPITALS & HEALTH NETWORKS, 2001, 75 (10): : 30 - +
  • [48] Patient Safety Safety first
    Feinmann, Jane
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 338
  • [49] Emotional safety is patient safety
    Lyndon, Audrey
    Davis, Dana-Ain
    Sharma, Anjana E.
    Scott, Karen A.
    [J]. BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2023, 32 (07) : 369 - 372
  • [50] Challenges and hurdles for patient safety in obstetric anesthesia in Japan
    Nobuko Fujita
    Naida M. Cole
    Yasuko Nagasaka
    [J]. Journal of Anesthesia, 2018, 32 : 901 - 907