IIR 03-303
Improving Safety Culture and Outcomes in VA Hospitals
David M. Gaba, MD VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA Palo Alto, CA Funding Period: July 2005 - December 2008 Portfolio Assignment: Health Care Organization and Implementation |
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Further research is needed in measuring safety climate in VA hospitals and to relating this climate to outcomes of patient care. We have developed the Patient Safety Climate in Hospital Organization (PSCHO) instrument to measure each individual's perceived safety climate by the amount of "problematic response" (responses that are against a safety climate) to survey questions. Our proposed project is a VA hospital companion to an AHRQ-funded project we are conducting on the safety climate in 120 non-VA hospitals nationwide. This study will enable the VA to obtain important information- alone and in comparison to private sector facilities - about the strength and uniformity of its safety climate, its variability across hospitals, work units, and Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs), as well as about the link between safety climate and patient outcomes in VA facilities. OBJECTIVE(S): Safety culture/safety climate of hospital personnel is a key component of patient safety. The purpose of the study is to assess the level of safety climate in VA hospitals and improve understanding of the safety culture in VA hospitals using the previously developed and validated Patient Safety Climate in Healthcare Organizations (PSCHO) survey in a nationwide sample of 30 VA hospitals. Our objectives are: * To assess safety climate in 30 VA hospitals and in a representative sub-sample of work units of high intrinsic hazard using the PSCHO instrument; * To compare safety climate to selected hospital characteristics, and to compare VA to non-VA facilities; * To compare PSCHO data to (measured by the Zammuto and Karkower survey) and implementation of quality improvement (QI) practices (measured using Baldrige scales); * To compare the level of safety climate to measures of patient safety outcomes; * To compare the level and uniformity of safety climate in VA hospitals to that in high-reliability organizations in other high-hazard industries. METHODS: The project obtained 2006 and 2007 primary data on the safety climate in VA by surveying employees with the PSCHO survey plus either the modified Baldrige survey or the abridged Zammuto and Krakower survey. Survey was administered twice to examine longitudinal changes in safety climate and to determine if relationships between climate and outcome are stable over time. We surveyed 100% of hospital-based physicians & senior managers (defined as department heads and above) and a 10% random sample of staff. In addition, at some hospitals, we surveyed 100% staff working in high hazard units. Secondary data (FY2005-2006) were obtained from a variety of VA and non-VA sources will investigate relationships between safety climate and PSIs & NSQIP outcome data, and hospital characteristics. We compared safety climate in VA and non-VA hospitals using comparable data being collected by the investigators on 120 non-VA hospitals. We will also compared VA safety climate with the safety climate in a non-health care organization (Naval aviators). The PSCHO consists of 42 Likert-scale questions and six demographic questions. For each question, a "problematic response" (PR) suggested a weak safety climate. We calculated average PR rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), accounting for sample proportion and patterns of non-response for each question and job-type across all participating hospitals. We applied multi-trait analysis to responses in the derivation sample to create an initial scale structure and confirmed this structure by applying confirmatory factor analysis in the validation sample. We compared results to a companion study that administered the PSCHO survey in 105 non-VA hospitals. FINDINGS/RESULTS: The response rate for both the 1st and 2nd survey administrations was 50%. The average overall PR rate across all hospitals and personnel for administrations 1 and 2 was 18.1% and 17.7%, respectively. Rates of PR varied widely between institutions, ranging from 4.4% to 49.6% and 4.9% to 46.2% during administration 1 and 2, respectively. The questions eliciting the highest and lowest PR rate for both administrations were "My unit recognizes individual safety achievement through rewards and incentives" and "If I make a mistake that has significant consequences and nobody notices, I do not tell anyone about it," respectively. For both administrations, we found that physicians and hospital employees had higher PR rates than senior managers (PRs for administration #1= 17.1, 17.3, and 9.8%, respectively); nurses had the highest PR rates of any job-type (PR for administration #1=20.8%; CI=17.0%-24.7%). In our psychometric analysis, we found empirical support for eleven scales: senior leadership, resources for safety, overall, unit leadership, unit norms, unit recognition, learning, psych safety 1: no retribution, psychological safety 2: protection for initiative, problem solving, and outcomes. Consistent with the private sector, we found that a) perceptions of safety culture differed among hospitals, job-type, and work area, b) senior managers had a more positive perception of safety culture than frontline staff, and c) employees working in high-hazard areas had a more negative perception of safety culture. For administration #1 data, we found that higher levels of safety climate were associated with hospital metropolitan location, location in South, and higher levels of group and entrepreneurial organizational culture and higher levels of organizational cultural balance. Higher levels of hierarchical culture were significantly associated with lower levels of safety climate. We found no significant association between overall hospital safety climate and rates of PSIs or NSQIP data. Although there was substantial overlap among the two groups, the range in safety climate among individual non-VA hospitals was larger than among VA hospitals. Safety climate was better on average in non-VA hospitals than in VA hospitals on 10 of 12 safety climate dimensions. Nevertheless, specific results suggest that neither non-VA nor VA hospitals has achieved superior safety climate as a group. IMPACT: This is the first systematic study of patient safety climate in VA hospitals. Findings indicate an overall positive safety climate across the VA, but there is room for improvement. Hospitals may wish to conduct specific interventions aimed at improving safety climate. External Links for this ProjectDimensions for VADimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.Learn more about Dimensions for VA. VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address. Search Dimensions for this project PUBLICATIONS:Journal Articles
DRA:
Health Systems Science
DRE: none Keywords: Safety MeSH Terms: none |