Bastien Boussat

Hospital survey on patient safety culture (HSOPS): variability of scoring strategies

Objective To assess the variability of safety culture dimension scores and their associated rankings depending on three different scoring strategies using the Hospital Survey On Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS). Design Cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire. Setting The study was conducted in an 1836-bed acute-care French university hospital with an annual volume of 135 999 stays, between April 2013 and November 2014. Participants All caregivers and technical-administrative staff with at least 6 months of employment, spending at least half of their working time in the hospital, were asked to participate. Intervention None. Main outcome measure The variability of the HSOPS results using three different scoring methods: the percentage of positive responses recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the averaged individual means and the averaged individual sums. Results The response rate was 78.6% (n = 3978). The percentage of positive responses resulted in lower scores compared to averaged individual means and averaged individual sums in the six least developed dimensions, and gave more widely spread scores and greater 95CIs in the six most developed dimensions. Department rankings also varied greatly depending on the scoring methods. Conclusion The values of the HSOPS scores and their corresponding rankings greatly depended on the computation method. This finding shows how important it is to agree on the use of the same scoring strategies, before broadly comparing results within and across organizations.

Sensitivity of a colorectal cancer screening program based on a guaiac test: A population-based study

BACKGROUND The main objective of this study was to estimate the sensitivity of a colorectal cancer-screening program based on a guaiac fecal occult blood (FOB) test. The secondary objective was to determine whether the sensitivity varied by sex and if the difference between males and females could be explained by differences in age group at the time of the test, round of screening, how the test was provided to the participant, tumor location, and the presence of theoretical screening program exclusion criteria. METHODS For the 2002-2006 period, we retrospectively analyzed data from the organized colorectal screening program in Isère, France, which was designed for asymptomatic individuals aged 50-74. Sensitivity was assessed considering the number of interval cancers diagnosed in the 2 years following the test. A logistical regression analysis was done to evaluate the factors associated with the sensitivity of the screening program. RESULTS A total of 506 participants were included in the analysis. The overall sensitivity of the screening program was 48.4%, being 58.3% for males and 32.5% for females. In multivariate analysis, sensitivity for males was still higher than for females (OR=2.1 [95% CI, 1.4-3.4]) after adjusting for age group, presence of exclusion criteria, the way the test was given, the round of participation, and the tumor location. A total of 183 (36.2%) study subjects presented with at least one exclusion criterion for the screening program. CONCLUSION The sensitivity of the colorectal cancer-screening program based on a guaiac test was insufficient, being higher for males than for females. This difference in sensitivity was not entirely explained by differences in age, characteristics of screening participation, and tumor location.

The contribution of open comments to understanding the results from the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS): A qualitative study

Introduction To develop high-quality and safe healthcare, a good safety culture is an important feature of healthcare-providing structures. The objective of this study was to analyze the qualitative data of the comments section of a Hospital Survey on Patient Safety (HSOPS) questionnaire to clarify the answers given to the closed questions. Method Using the original data from a cross-sectional survey of 5,064 employees at a single university hospital in France, we conducted a qualitative study by analyzing the comments of a HSOPS survey and conducting in-depth interviews with 19 healthcare providers. We submitted the comments and the interviews to a thematic analysis. Results A total of 3,978 questionnaires were returned, with 247 comments collected. The qualitative analysis identified several structural failures. The main categories of the open comments were concordant with the lowest dimension scores found in the quantitative analysis. The most frequently reported failures were related to the staffing and hospital management support dimensions. The healthcare professionals perceived the lack of resources, including understaffing, as the major barrier to the development of a patient safety culture. Concrete organizational issues related to hospital handoffs and risk coordination were identified, such as transfers from the emergency departments and the lack of feedback following self-reporting of incidents. Conclusion The analysis of the open comments complemented the HSOPS scores, increasing the level of detail in the description of the hospital’s patient safety culture. Combined with a classical quantitative approach used in HSOPS-based surveys, the qualitative analysis of open comments is useful to identify organizational weaknesses within the hospital.

Experience feedback committees: A way of implementing a root cause analysis practice in hospital medical departments

Background The experience feedback committee (EFC) is a tool designed to involve medical teams in patient safety management, through root cause analysis (RCA) within the team. Objectives To investigate the functioning of EFCs in the departments of a large university-affiliated hospital in France and to consider its potential contribution to the management of patient safety. Methods Cross-sectional, observational study, based on an analysis of the documents produced by the EFCs for 1 year. Data were collected independently by two investigators in meeting minutes, adverse event reports and event analysis reports. Results The study included all 20 EFCs operating in the hospitals medical departments. During the study year, committees held 164 meetings, reviewed 1707 adverse events, conducted 91 event analyses and decided on 206 corrective actions. The median number of corrective actions adopted by each EFC was five actions (range, 0–62). A root cause analysis (RCA) was present in 76% of the analysis reports, and these analyses were complete in only 23% of the reports. There was also a lack of planning corrective actions: an implementation deadline was only defined in 26% of the actions. Conclusions Healthcare professionals adhered to the system-based approach to patient safety, but we observed difficulties in holding regular meetings and deviations from the theoretical framework. These findings confirm the difficulties of practicing RCA in the healthcare setting. Nevertheless, EFCs can be vectors of safety culture and teamwork.

Age-Related Differences in Reperfusion Therapy and Outcomes for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Myocardial Infarction

To compare timely access to reperfusion therapy and outcomes according to age of older adults with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEM) managed within an integrated regional system of care.

An Experience Feedback Committee for Improving Patient Safety: An Observational Study in Anaesthesiology

Background & Aims: An experience feedback committee (EFC) is a management method for patientsafety designed for a medical team. The aim of this study was to analyse the functioning of an EFC in an anaesthesia department and to explore its contribution to patient safety.