A cross-sectional study of patient safety culture in acute-care hospitals in Greece
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The development of a culture of safety can bring about an improvement in patient safety and quality of care. We aimed to investigate patient safety culture within an acute-care hospital setting in Greece. Methods A cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) questionnaire in two large acute-care hospitals in Greece. We examined questionnaire’s factorial structure using confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis. We assessed scales’ internal consistency, test–retest reliability and construct validity. To assess changes in patient safety culture, we conducted surveys at two points in time (2009 and 2014). Regression analysis examined whether any changes in scale scores could have been due to quality programs implementation or participants’ professional characteristics. Results Six scales with satisfactory psychometric properties emerged, namely ‘Teamwork Across Hospital Units’, ‘Teamwork Within Hospital Units’, ‘Feedback and Communication About Error’, ‘Frequency of Event Reporting’, ‘Supervisor/Manager Expectations and ‘Actions Promoting Safety’, ‘Hospital Management Support for Patient Safety’. Overall ratings of patient safety did not change over time. However, one of the two institutions experienced an increase in reported events. Conclusions The HSOPSC is a valuable tool for assessing patient safety culture in Greece. Moreover, despite the radical reduction in the financing of the Greek National Health System reported between 2009 and 2014, patient safety culture did not deteriorate. A worldwide trend towards increasing patient safety awareness, along with the increasing effort of hospitals’ administration to support patient safety might explain this lack of differences between the two points in time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".