Factors influencing patient safety culture in operating room in a teaching hospital in Jordan: a qualitative descriptive study

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Purpose

To explore the perceptions of surgical team members in a tertiary hospital in Jordan toward the factors influencing patient safety culture (PSC).

Design/methodology/approach

This was a qualitative descriptive study intended to characterize the factors that influence PSC. Interviews were conducted with health-care providers in the operation room (OR) in a tertiary Jordanian hospital. Participants included surgeons, anesthetists, nurses and senior surgical residents who had worked for three years minimum in the OR. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.

Findings

A total of 33 interviews were conducted. Thematic analysis of the content yielded four major themes: (1) operational factors, (2) organizational factors, (3) health-care professionals factors and (4) patient factors. The respondents emphasized the role of the physical layout of the OR, implementing new techniques and new equipment, and management support to establish a safety culture in the operating room setting.

Originality/value

The present research study will have implications for hospitals and health-care providers in Jordan for developing organizational strategies to eliminate or decrease the occurrence of adverse events and improve patient safety in the OR.

Related collections

Most cited references 56

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

A Tong, P SAINSBURY, J. Craig (2007)

Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

0 comments Cited 8081 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Thematic analysis

Victoria Clarke, Virginia Braun (2017)

0 comments Cited 363 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The qualitative research interview.

Barbara DiCicco-Bloom, Benjamin Crabtree (2006)

Interviews are among the most familiar strategies for collecting qualitative data. The different qualitative interviewing strategies in common use emerged from diverse disciplinary perspectives resulting in a wide variation among interviewing approaches. Unlike the highly structured survey interviews and questionnaires used in epidemiology and most health services research, we examine less structured interview strategies in which the person interviewed is more a participant in meaning making than a conduit from which information is retrieved. In this article we briefly review the more common qualitative interview methods and then focus on the widely used individual face-to-face in-depth interview, which seeks to foster learning about individual experiences and perspectives on a given set of issues. We discuss methods for conducting in-depth interviews and consider relevant ethical issues with particular regard to the rights and protection of the participants.