The study of adverse event disclosure has typically focused on the words that are said to the patient and family members after an event. But there is also growing interest in determining how patients and their families can be involved in the analysis of the adverse events that harmed them. We conducted a two-phase study to understand whether patients and families who have experienced an adverse event should be involved in the postevent analysis following the disclosure of a medical error. We first conducted twenty-eight interviews with patients, family members, clinicians, and administrators to determine the extent to which patients and family members are included in event analysis processes and to learn how their experiences might be improved. Then we reviewed our interview findings with patients and health care experts at a one-day national conference in October 2011. After evaluating the findings, conference participants concluded that increasing the involvement of patients and their families in the event analysis process was desirable but needed to be structured in a patient-centered way to be successful. We conclude by describing when and how information from patients might be incorporated into the event analysis process and by offering recommendations on how this might be accomplished.

Interns and residents commonly observed unprofessional behaviour yet were less likely to speak up about it compared with traditional safety threats even when they perceived high potential patient harm. Measuring SUC-Safe, and particularly SUC-Prof, may fill an existing gap in safety culture assessment.

Given that the SAQ and HSOPS had similar reliability and predictive validity, investigators and quality and safety leaders should consider survey length, content, sensitivity to change and the ability to benchmark when selecting a patient safety culture survey.

We created and provided evidence for the reliability and validity of two measures (SUC-Safe and SUC-Prof scales) associated with self-reported speaking up behaviour among residents. These two scales may fill an existing gap in residency and safety culture assessments by measuring the openness of communication about safety and professionalism concerns, two important aspects of safety culture that are under-represented in existing metrics.

background Variation in health care delivery and outcomes in NICUs may be partly explained by differences in safety culture. objective To describe NICU caregiver assessments of safety culture, explore the variability within and between NICUs on safety culture domains, and test for association with caregiver characteristics. methods We surveyed NICU caregivers in a convenience sample of 12 hospitals from a single health care system, using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ). The six scales of the SAQ include teamwork climate, safety climate, job satisfaction, stress recognition, perception of management, and working conditions. For each NICU we calculated scale means, standard deviations and percent positives (percent agreement). results We found substantial variation in safety culture domains among participating NICUs. A composite mean score across the six safety culture domains ranged from 56.3 to 77.8 on a 100-point scale and NICUs in the top four NICUs were significantly different from the bottom four (p < .001). Across the six domains, respondent assessments varied widely, but were least positive on perceptions of management (3–80% positive; mean 33.3%) and stress recognition (18–61% positive; mean 41.3%). Comparisons of SAQ scale scores between NICUs and a previously published cohort of adult ICUs generally revealed higher scores for NICUs. Physicians composite scores were 8.2 (p = .04) and 9.5 (p =.02) points higher than nurses and ancillary personnel. conclusion Significant variation and scope for improvement in safety culture exists among this sample of NICUs. The NICU variation was similar to variation in adult ICUs, but NICU scores were generally higher than adult ICU scores. Future studies should validate whether safety culture as measured with the SAQ correlates with clinical and operational outcomes in the NICU setting.