Exploring Canadians' and Europeans' Health Care Professionals' Perception of Biological Risks, Patient Safety, and Professionals' Safety Practices

The influence of patient-centeredness on patient safety perception among inpatients

PURPOSE

This study investigated the influence of patient-centeredness on patient safety perception among inpatients, with particular focus on the relationships between subfactors of patient-centeredness and patient safety perception.

METHODS

Data were collected from 122 inpatients in a university hospital from September 24 to October 8, 2019. Patient-centeredness was evaluated using the Patient-Centeredness Assessment Scale; patient safety perception was evaluated using the Korean version of the Patient Safety Perception Scale. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted using SPSS for Windows 24.0.

RESULTS

Average patient-centeredness score among inpatients was 77.14 ± 12.64 (range 0-100), and average patient safety perception score was 99.24 ± 15.90 (range 24-120). Patient-centeredness influenced patient safety perception (R2 = 70%, F = 27.75, p < .001). With respect to subfactors of patient safety perception, the medical team's activities to ensure safety was affected by the general treatment process and overall evaluation of patient-centeredness (R2 = 54%, F = 13.14, p < .001); patient safety practice was influenced only by the general treatment process (R2 = 39%, F = 7.02, p < .001); and trust in the medical system was affected by nurses' service, the general treatment process, and the hospital environment (R2 = 44%, F = 8.49, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

To enhance patient safety perception, strategies should seek to strengthen patient-centeredness and its related subfactors, particularly the general treatment process, the hospital environment, and nurses' service.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Corona Pandemic in Social Sciences: A Review of Influential Aspects and Conceptual Structure

Corona pandemic has affected the whole world, and it is a highly researched area in biological sciences. As the current pandemic has affected countries socially and economically, the purpose of this bibliometric analysis is to provide a holistic review of the corona pandemic in the field of social sciences. This study aims to highlight significant, influential aspects, research streams, and themes. We have reviewed 395 journal articles related to coronavirus in the field of social sciences from 2003 to 2020. We have deployed 'biblioshiny' a web-interface of the 'bibliometrix 3.0' package of R-studio to conduct bibliometric analysis and visualization. In the field of social sciences, we have reported influential aspects of coronavirus literature. We have found that the 'Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report' is the top journal. The core article of coronavirus literature is 'Guidelines for preventing health-care-associated pneumonia'. The most commonly used word, in titles, abstracts, author's keywords, and keywords plus, is 'SARS'. Top affiliation is 'The University of Hong Kong'. Hong Kong is a leading country based on citations, and the USA is on top based on total publications. We have used a conceptual framework to identify potential research streams and themes in coronavirus literature. Four research streams are found by deploying a co-occurrence network. These research streams are 'Social and economic effects of epidemic disease', 'Infectious disease calamities and control', 'Outbreak of COVID 19,' and 'Infectious diseases and the role of international organizations'. Finally, a thematic map is used to provide a holistic understanding by dividing significant themes into basic or transversal, emerging or declining, motor, highly developed, but isolated themes. These themes and subthemes have proposed future directions and critical areas of research.

Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

This review is one of a series of rapid reviews that Cochrane contributors have prepared to inform the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. When new respiratory infectious diseases become widespread, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers' adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines becomes even more important. Strategies in these guidelines include the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as masks, face shields, gloves and gowns; the separation of patients with respiratory infections from others; and stricter cleaning routines. These strategies can be difficult and time-consuming to adhere to in practice. Authorities and healthcare facilities therefore need to consider how best to support healthcare workers to implement them.

OBJECTIVES

To identify barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched OVID MEDLINE on 26 March 2020. As we searched only one database due to time constraints, we also undertook a rigorous and comprehensive scoping exercise and search of the reference lists of key papers. We did not apply any date limit or language limits.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies (with a distinct qualitative component) that focused on the experiences and perceptions of healthcare workers towards factors that impact on their ability to adhere to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases. We included studies of any type of healthcare worker with responsibility for patient care. We included studies that focused on IPC guidelines (local, national or international) for respiratory infectious diseases in any healthcare setting. These selection criteria were framed by an understanding of the needs of health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts and full texts identified by our search. We used a prespecified sampling frame to sample from the eligible studies, aiming to capture a range of respiratory infectious disease types, geographical spread and data-rich studies. We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this synthesis. We assessed methodological limitations using an adapted version of the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyse and synthesise the evidence. This provided upfront analytical categories, with scope for further thematic analysis. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and developed implications for practice.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 36 relevant studies and sampled 20 of these studies for our analysis. Ten of these studies were from Asia, four from Africa, four from Central and North America and two from Australia. The studies explored the views and experiences of nurses, doctors and other healthcare workers when dealing with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1, MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome), tuberculosis (TB), or seasonal influenza. Most of these healthcare workers worked in hospitals; others worked in primary and community care settings. Our review points to several barriers and facilitators that influenced healthcare workers' ability to adhere to IPC guidelines. The following factors are based on findings assessed as of moderate to high confidence. Healthcare workers felt unsure as to how to adhere to local guidelines when they were long and ambiguous or did not reflect national or international guidelines. They could feel overwhelmed because local guidelines were constantly changing. They also described how IPC strategies led to increased workloads and fatigue, for instance because they had to use PPE and take on additional cleaning. Healthcare workers described how their responses to IPC guidelines were influenced by the level of support they felt that they received from their management team. Clear communication about IPC guidelines was seen as vital. But healthcare workers pointed to a lack of training about the infection itself and about how to use PPE. They also thought it was a problem when training was not mandatory. Sufficient space to isolate patients was also seen as vital. A lack of isolation rooms, anterooms and shower facilities was a problem. Other important practical measures described by healthcare workers included minimising overcrowding, fast-tracking infected patients, restricting visitors, and providing easy access to handwashing facilities. A lack of PPE, and equipment that was of poor quality, was a serious concern for healthcare workers and managers. They also pointed to the need to adjust the volume of supplies as infection outbreaks continued. Healthcare workers believed that they followed IPC guidance more closely when they saw the value of it. Some healthcare workers felt motivated to follow the guidance because of fear of infecting themselves or their families, or because they felt responsible for their patients. Some healthcare workers found it difficult to use masks and other equipment when it made patients feel isolated, frightened or stigmatised. Healthcare workers also found masks and other equipment uncomfortable to use. The workplace culture could also influence whether healthcare workers followed IPC guidelines or not. Across many of the findings, healthcare workers pointed to the importance of including all staff, including cleaning staff, porters, kitchen staff and other support staff when implementing IPC guidelines.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare workers point to several factors that influence their ability and willingness to follow IPC guidelines when managing respiratory infectious diseases. These include factors tied to the guideline itself and how it is communicated, support from managers, workplace culture, training, physical space, access to and trust in personal protective equipment, and a desire to deliver good patient care. The review also highlights the importance of including all facility staff, including support staff, when implementing IPC guidelines.

Adoption of infection prevention and control practices by healthcare workers in Québec: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To describe barriers and facilitators to the adoption of recommended infection prevention and control (IPC) practices among healthcare workers (HCWs).

METHODS

A qualitative research design was used. Individual semistructured interviews with HCWs and observations of clinical practices were conducted from February to May 2018 in 8 care units of 2 large tertiary-care hospitals in Montreal (Québec, Canada).

RESULTS

We interviewed 13 managers, 4 nurses, 2 physicians, 3 housekeepers, and 2 medical laboratory technologists. We conducted 7 observations by following IPC nurses (n = 3), nurses (n = 2), or patient attendants (n = 2) in their work routines. Barriers to IPC adoption were related to the context of care, workplace environment issues, and communication issues. The main facilitator of the IPC adoption by HCWs was the "development of an IPC culture or safety culture." The "IPC culture" relied upon leadership support by managers committed to IPC, shared belief in the importance of IPC measures to limit healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), collaboration and good communication among staff, as well as proactivity and ownership of IPC measures (ie, development of local solutions to reduce HAIs and "working together" toward common goals).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of recommended IPC measures by HCWs is strongly influenced by the "IPC culture." The IPC culture was not uniform within hospital and differences in IPC culture were identified between care units.