Background: Despite the emphasis on patient safety in health care, few organizations have evaluated the extent to which safety is a strategic priority or their culture supports patient safety. In response to the Institute of Medicine's report and to an organizational commitment to patient safety, we conducted a systematic assessment of safety at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) and, from this, developed a strategic plan to improve safety. The specific aims of this study were to evaluate the extent to which the culture supports patient safety at JHH and the extent to which safety is a strategic priority. Methods: During July and August 2001 we implemented two surveys in disparate populations to assess patient safety. The Safety Climate Scale (SCS) was administered to a sample of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other ICU staff. SCS assesses perceptions of a strong and proactive organizational commitment to patient safety. The second survey instrument, called Strategies for Leadership (SLS), evaluated the extent to which safety was a strategic priority for the organization. This survey was administered to clinical and administrative leaders. Results: We received 395 completed SCS surveys from 82% of the departments and 86% of the nursing units. Staff perceived that supervisors had a greater commitment to safety than senior leaders. Nurses had higher scores than physicians for perceptions of safety. Twenty three completed SLS surveys were received from 77% of the JHH Patient Safety Committee members and 50% of the JHH Management Committee members. Management Committee responses were more positive than Patient Safety Committee, indicating that management perceived safety efforts to be further developed. Strategic planning received the lowest scores from both committees. Conclusions: We believe this is one of the first large scale efforts to measure institutional culture of safety and then design improvements in health care. The survey results suggest that strategic planning of patient safety needs enhancement. Several efforts to improve our culture of safety were initiated based on these results, which should lead to measurable improvements in patient safety.
Among all complications of airway management, dental injury is the most common cause of patient complaints with medicolegal consequences. Over an 8-year period, data on dental injury were collected within a large university hospital system that included community, tertiary, and quaternary care centers. Patient characteristics were compared among all patients receiving anesthesia care using billing data collected from the same period. Of the 816,690 patients who received anesthesia care, there were 360 dental injuries, giving an overall incidence of 1:2,269 (0.044%). Patients receiving general anesthesia were at an increased risk for dental injuries, with an incidence of 1:1,754 (0.057%) compared with patients receiving monitored anesthesia care in whom the incidence was 1:12,500 (0.008%). Patients in the age group 18 to 65 years had a higher incidence of dental injuries of 1:1,818 (0.055%) compared with pediatric patients, who had an incidence of 1:7,692 (0.013%). Emergency procedures were not associated with an increased risk of dental injury in the 816,690 cases. However, of the 360 patients who sustained a dental injury, emergency procedures were associated with a higher incidence of injuring multiple teeth.
Mistakes can be life-threatening and result in malpractice claims. There are few studies that discuss malpractice claims and nursing. The purpose was to identify possible relationships between the actions, behaviors, or characteristics of RNs and the injury suffered by a patient involved in a compensable event. Claims were analyzed retrospectively. Using the Fischer exact test, nurse inaction yielded a higher patient outcome severity score. No single nurse behavior or characteristic was significantly related to the patient outcome severity score. Findings support the belief that system problems may be a contributing factor.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.