Survey of safety climate in public hospitals in Costa Rica in 1997

In response to growing concern for occupational health and safety in the public hospital system in Costa Rica, a research program was initiated in 1995 to evaluate and improve the safety climate in the national healthcare system through regional training programs, and to develop the capacity of the occupational health commissions in these settings to improve the identification and mitigation of workplace risks. A cross-sectional survey of 1000 hospital-based healthcare workers was conducted in 1997 to collect baseline data that will be used to develop appropriate worker training programs in occupational health. The objectives of this survey were to: (1) describe the safety climate within the national hospital system, (2) identify factors associated with safety climate focusing on individual and organizational variables, and (3) to evaluate the relationship between safety climate and workplace injuries and safety practices of employees. Individual factors evaluated included the demographic variables of age, gender, education and profession. Organizational factors evaluated included training, psychosocial work environment, job-task demands, availability of protective equipment and administrative controls. Work-related injuries and safety practices of employees included the type and frequency of injuries experienced and reported, and compliance with established safety practices. Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that training and administrative controls were the two most significant predictors of safety climate. None of the demographic variables were significant predictors of safety climate. Safety climate was inversely and significantly associated with workplace injuries and positively and significantly associated with safety practices. These results suggest that training and administrative controls should be included in future training efforts and that improving safety climate will decrease workplace injuries and increase safety practices. ^

A multi-site pilot test study to measure safety climate in the university work setting

Next to leisure, sport, and household activities, the most common activity resulting in medically consulted injuries and poisonings in the United States is work, with an estimated 4 million workplace related episodes reported in 2008 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). To address the risks inherent to various occupations, risk management programs are typically put in place that include worker training, engineering controls, and personal protective equipment. Recent studies have shown that such interventions alone are insufficient to adequately manage workplace risks, and that the climate in which the workers and safety program exist (known as the "safety climate") is an equally important consideration. The organizational safety climate is so important that many studies have focused on developing means of measuring it in various work settings. While safety climate studies have been reported for several industrial settings, published studies on assessing safety climate in the university work setting are largely absent. Universities are particularly unique workplaces because of the potential exposure to a diversity of agents representing both acute and chronic risks. Universities are also unique because readily detectable health and safety outcomes are relatively rare. The ability to measure safety climate in a work setting with rarely observed systemic outcome measures could serve as a powerful means of measure for the evaluation of safety risk management programs. ^ The goal of this research study was the development of a survey tool to measure safety climate specifically in the university work setting. The use of a standardized tool also allows for comparisons among universities throughout the United States. A specific study objective was accomplished to quantitatively assess safety climate at five universities across the United States. At five universities, 971 participants completed an online questionnaire to measure the safety climate. The average safety climate score across the five universities was 3.92 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating very high perceptions of safety at these universities. The two lowest overall dimensions of university safety climate were "acknowledgement of safety performance" and "department and supervisor's safety commitment". The results underscore how the perception of safety climate is significantly influenced at the local level. A second study objective regarding evaluating the reliability and validity of the safety climate questionnaire was accomplished. A third objective fulfilled was to provide executive summaries resulting from the questionnaire to the participating universities' health & safety professionals and collect feedback on usefulness, relevance and perceived accuracy. Overall, the professionals found the survey and results to be very useful, relevant and accurate. Finally, the safety climate questionnaire will be offered to other universities for benchmarking purposes at the annual meeting of a nationally recognized university health and safety organization. The ultimate goal of the project was accomplished and was the creation of a standardized tool that can be used for measuring safety climate in the university work setting and can facilitate meaningful comparisons amongst institutions.^

Barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of and implications for injury rates of an IV catheter safety device

This study has the purpose of determining the barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of the Johnson and Johnson Protectiv®* Plus IV catheter safety needle device and implications for needlestick injuries at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, Texas. A one-time cross-sectional survey of 620 responding nurses was conducted by this researcher during December, 2000. The study objectives were to: (1) describe the perceived (a) organizational and individual barriers and facilitators and (b) acceptance of implementation of the IV catheter device; (2) examine the relative importance of these predictors; (3) describe (a) perceived changes in needlestick injuries after implementation of the device; (b) the reported incidence of injuries; and (c) the extent of underreporting by nurses; and (4) examine the relative importance of (a) the preceding predictors and (b) acceptance of the device in predicting perceived changes in needlestick injuries. Safety climate and training were evaluated as organizational factors. Individual factors evaluated were experience with the device, including time using it and frequency of use, and background information, including nursing unit, and length of time as a nurse in this hospital and in total nursing career. The conceptual framework was based upon the safety climate model. Descriptive statistics and multiple and logistic regression were utilized to address the study objectives. ^ The findings showed widespread acceptance of the device and a strong perception that it reduced the number of needlesticks. Acceptance was notably predicted by adequate training, appropriate time between training and device use, solid safety climate, and short length of service, in that order. A barrier to acceptance was nurses' longtime of use of previous needle technologies. Over four-fifths of nurses were compliant in always using the device. Compliance had two facilitators: length of time using device and, to a lesser extent, safety climate. Rates of compliance tended to be lower among nurses in units in which the device was frequently used. ^ High quality training and an atmosphere of caring about nurse safety stand out as primary facilitators that other institutions would need to adopt in order to achieve maximum success in implementing safety programs involving utilization of new safety devices. ^

For-profit business safety interventions: A systematic, descriptive review of the literature

The purpose of this research was to determine if principles from organizational theory could be used as a framework to compare and contrast safety interventions developed by for-profit industry for the time period 1986–1996. A literature search of electronic databases and manual search of journals and local university libraries' book stacks was conducted for safety interventions developed by for-profit businesses. To maintain a constant regulatory environment, the business sectors of nuclear power, aviation and non-profits were excluded. Safety intervention evaluations were screened for scientific merit. Leavitt's model from organization theory was updated to include safety climate and renamed the Updated Leavitt's Model. In all, 8000 safety citations were retrieved, 525 met the inclusion criteria, 255 met the organizational safety intervention criteria, and 50 met the scientific merit criteria. Most came from non-public health journals. These 50 were categorized by the Updated Leavitt's Model according to where within the organizational structure the intervention took place. Evidence tables were constructed for descriptive comparison. The interventions clustered in the areas of social structure, safety climate, the interaction between social structure and participants, and the interaction between technology and participants. No interventions were found in the interactions between social structure and technology, goals and technology, or participants and goals. Despite the scientific merit criteria, many still had significant study design weaknesses. Five interventions tested for statistical significance but none of the interventions commented on the power of their study. Empiric studies based on safety climate theorems had the most rigorous designs. There was an attempt in these studies to address randomization amongst subjects to avoid bias. This work highlights the utility of using the Updated Leavitt's Model, a model from organizational theory, as a framework when comparing safety interventions. This work also highlights the need for better study design of future trials of safety interventions. ^

The relationship between surgical residents' perception of leadership and patient safety culture

Introduction. Patient safety culture is the integration of interrelated practices that once developed is supported by both the culture and leadership of the organization (Sagan, 1993). The purpose of this study is to describe and examine the relationship between surgical residents’ perception of their leadership and the resulting organizational safety culture within their clinical setting. This assessment is important to understanding the extent that leadership style affects the perception of the safety culture.^ Methods. A secondary dataset was used which included data from 68 surgical residents from two survey instruments, Organizational Description Questionnaire (ODQ) and Patient Safety Climate In Healthcare Organizations (PSCHO) Survey. Multiple regressions followed by hierarchical regressions with the introduction of the Post Graduate Year (PGY) variable examined the association between the leadership styles, Transactional and Transformational and the organizational safety culture variables, Overall Emphasis on Safety, Senior management engagement, Organizational resources for safety. Independent t-tests were conducted to assess whether males and females differ among the organizational safety culture variables and either leadership style.^ Results. The surgical residents perceived their organizational leadership to have greater emphasis placed on transformational leadership culture style relative to transactional leadership culture style. The only significant association found was between Transformational leadership and Organizational resources for safety. PGY had no significant effect on the leadership or the safety culture perceived. No significant difference was found between females and males in regards to the safety culture or the leadership style.^ Discussion. These results have implications as they support the premise for the study which is surgical residents perceive their existing leadership and organizational culture to be more transformational in nature than transactional. Significance was found between the leadership perceived and one of the safety culture variables, Organizational resources for safety. The foundation for this association lies in the fact that surgical residents are the personnel which are a part of the organizational resources. Although PGY differentiation did not seem to play a difference in the leadership perceived this could be attributed to the small sample size. No gender difference were found which supports the assumption that within such a highly specialized group such as surgical residents there is no gender differences since the highly specialized field draws a certain type of person with distinct characteristics. In future research these survey tools can be used to gauge the survey audiences’ perception and safety interventions can be developed based on the results. ^