Dimensions of patient safety culture in family practice.

6Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Safety culture has been shown to affect patient safety in healthcare. While the United States and United Kingdom have studied the dimensions that reflect patient safety culture in family practice settings, to date, this has not been done in Canada. Differences in the healthcare systems between these countries and Canada may affect the dimensions found to be relevant here. Thus, it is important to identify and compare the dimensions from the United States and the United Kingdom in a Canadian context. The objectives of this study were to explore the dimensions of patient safety culture that relate to family practice in Canada and to determine if differences and similarities exist between dimensions found in Canada and those found in previous studies undertaken in the United States and the United Kingdom. A qualitative study was undertaken applying thematic analysis using focus groups with family practice offices and supplementary key stakeholders. Analysis of the data indicated that most of the dimensions from the United States and United Kingdom are appropriate in our Canadian context. Exceptions included owner/managing partner/leadership support for patient safety, job satisfaction and overall perceptions of patient safety and quality. Two unique dimensions were identified in the Canadian context: disclosure and accepting responsibility for errors. Based on this early work, it is important to consider differences in care settings when understanding dimensions of patient safety culture. We suggest that additional research in family practice settings is critical to further understand the influence of context on patient safety culture.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Palacios-Derflingher, L., O’Beirne, M., Sterling, P., Zwicker, K., Harding, B. K., & Casebeer, A. (2010). Dimensions of patient safety culture in family practice. Healthcare Quarterly (Toronto, Ont.), 13 Spec No, 121–127. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.2010.21977

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free