Patient safety culture improvements depend on basic healthcare education: a longitudinal simulation-based intervention study at two Danish hospitals

Simulation-based team training for healthcare professionals in pediatric departments: study protocol for a nonrandomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems worldwide face challenges related to patient safety, quality of care, and interprofessional collaboration. Simulation-based team training has emerged as a promising approach to address some of these challenges by providing healthcare professionals with a controlled and safe environment to enhance their teamwork and communication skills. The purpose of this study protocol is to describe an intervention using simulation-based team training in pediatric departments.

METHODS

Using a parallel-group, non-randomized controlled trial design, a simulation-based team training intervention will be implemented across four pediatric departments in Denmark. Another four pediatric departments will serve as controls. The intervention implies that healthcare professionals engage in simulation-based team training at a higher quantity and frequency than they did previously. Development of the intervention occurred from April 2022 to April 2023. Implementation of the intervention occurs from April 2023 to April 2024. Evaluation of the intervention is planned from April 2024 to April 2025. All simulation activity both before and during the intervention will be registered, making it possible to compare outcomes across time periods (before versus after) and across groups (intervention versus control). To evaluate the effects of the intervention, we will conduct four analyses. Analysis 1 investigates if simulation-based team training is related to sick leave among healthcare professionals. Analysis 2 explores if the simulation intervention has an impact on patient safety culture. Analysis 3 examines if simulation-based team training is associated with the treatment of critically ill newborns. Finally, Analysis 4 conducts a cost-benefit analysis, highlighting the potential return on investment.

DISCUSSION

The implemented simulation-based team training intervention can be defined as a complex intervention. Following the Medical Research Council framework and guidelines, the intervention in this project encompasses feasibility assessment, planning of intervention, implementation of intervention, and rigorous data analysis. Furthermore, the project emphasizes practical considerations such as stakeholder collaboration, facilitator training, and equipment management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered as a clinical trial on clinicaltrials.gov, with the identifier NCT06064045.

Global consensus statement on simulation-based practice in healthcare

ABSTRACT

Simulation plays a pivotal role in addressing universal healthcare challenges, reducing education inequities, and improving mortality, morbidity and patient experiences. It enhances healthcare processes and systems, contributing significantly to the development of a safety culture within organizations. It has proven to be cost-effective and successful in enhancing team performance, fostering workforce resilience and improving patient outcomes.Through an international collaborative effort, an iterative consultation process was conducted with 50 societies operating across 67 countries within six continents. This process revealed common healthcare challenges and simulation practices worldwide. The intended audience for this statement includes policymakers, healthcare organization leaders, health education institutions, and simulation practitioners. It aims to establish a consensus on the key priorities for the broad adoption of exemplary simulation practice that benefits patients and healthcare workforces globally.

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

Advocating for the benefits that simulation provides to patients, staff and organizations is crucial, as well as promoting its adoption and integration into daily learning and practice throughout the healthcare spectrum. Low-cost, high-impact simulation methods should be leveraged to expand global accessibility and integrate into system improvement processes as well as undergraduate and postgraduate curricula. Support at institutional and governmental level is essential, necessitating a unified and concerted approach in terms of political, strategic and financial commitment.It is imperative that simulation is used appropriately, employing evidence-based quality assurance approaches that adhere to recognized standards of best practice. These standards include faculty development, evaluation, accrediting, credentialing, and certification.We must endeavor to provide equitable and sustainable access to high-quality, contextually relevant simulation-based learning opportunities, firmly upholding the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion. This should be complemented with a renewed emphasis on research and scholarship in this field.

CALL FOR ACTION

We urge policymakers and leaders to formally acknowledge and embrace the benefits of simulation in healthcare practice and education. This includes a commitment to sustained support and a mandate for the application of simulation within education, training, and clinical environments.We advocate for healthcare systems and education institutions to commit themselves to the goal of high-quality healthcare and improved patient outcomes. This commitment should encompass the promotion and resource support of simulation-based learning opportunities for individuals and interprofessional teams throughout all stages and levels of a caregiver's career, in alignment with best practice standards.We call upon simulation practitioners to champion healthcare simulation as an indispensable learning tool, adhere to best practice standards, maintain a commitment to lifelong learning, and persist in their fervent advocacy for patient safety.This statement, the result of an international collaborative effort, aims to establish a consensus on the key priorities for the broad adoption of exemplary simulation practice that benefits patients and healthcare workforces globally.

Global consensus statement on simulation-based practice in healthcare

Simulation plays a pivotal role in addressing universal healthcare challenges, reducing education inequities, and improving mortality, morbidity and patient experiences. It enhances healthcare processes and systems, contributing significantly to the development of a safety culture within organizations. It has proven to be cost-effective and successful in enhancing team performance, fostering workforce resilience and improving patient outcomes.Through an international collaborative effort, an iterative consultation process was conducted with 50 societies operating across 67 countries within six continents. This process revealed common healthcare challenges and simulation practices worldwide. The intended audience for this statement includes policymakers, healthcare organization leaders, health education institutions, and simulation practitioners. It aims to establish a consensus on the key priorities for the broad adoption of exemplary simulation practice that benefits patients and healthcare workforces globally.Key recommendations Advocating for the benefits that simulation provides to patients, staff and organizations is crucial, as well as promoting its adoption and integration into daily learning and practice throughout the healthcare spectrum. Low-cost, high-impact simulation methods should be leveraged to expand global accessibility and integrate into system improvement processes as well as undergraduate and postgraduate curricula. Support at institutional and governmental level is essential, necessitating a unified and concerted approach in terms of political, strategic and financial commitment.It is imperative that simulation is used appropriately, employing evidence-based quality assurance approaches that adhere to recognized standards of best practice. These standards include faculty development, evaluation, accrediting, credentialing, and certification.We must endeavor to provide equitable and sustainable access to high-quality, contextually relevant simulation-based learning opportunities, firmly upholding the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion. This should be complemented with a renewed emphasis on research and scholarship in this field.Call for action We urge policymakers and leaders to formally acknowledge and embrace the benefits of simulation in healthcare practice and education. This includes a commitment to sustained support and a mandate for the application of simulation within education, training, and clinical environments.We advocate for healthcare systems and education institutions to commit themselves to the goal of high-quality healthcare and improved patient outcomes. This commitment should encompass the promotion and resource support of simulation-based learning opportunities for individuals and interprofessional teams throughout all stages and levels of a caregiver's career, in alignment with best practice standards.We call upon simulation practitioners to champion healthcare simulation as an indispensable learning tool, adhere to best practice standards, maintain a commitment to lifelong learning, and persist in their fervent advocacy for patient safety.This statement, the result of an international collaborative effort, aims to establish a consensus on the key priorities for the broad adoption of exemplary simulation practice that benefits patients and healthcare workforces globally.

Review: application of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) in primary care - a systematic synthesis on validity, descriptive and comparative results, and variance across organisational units

Patient safety research has focused mostly on the hospital and acute care setting whereas assessments of patient safety climate in primary health care settings are warranted. Valid questionnaires as e.g., the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) may capture staff perceptions of patient safety climate but until now, an overview of the use of SAQ in primary care has not been systematically presented. Thus, the aim of this systematic review is to present an overview of SAQ used in primary care.Methods The electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, PsycInfo and Web of Science were used to find studies that used any version of SAQ in primary care. Studies were excluded if only abstract or poster was available, as the information in abstract and posters was deemed insufficient. Commentaries and nonempirical studies (e.g., study protocols) were excluded. Only English manuscripts were included.Results A total of 43 studies were included and 40 of them fell into four categories: 1) validation analysis, 2) descriptive analysis, 3) variance assessment and 4) intervention evaluation and were included in further analyses. Some studies fell into more than one of the four categories. Seventeen studies aimed to validate different versions of SAQ in a variety of settings and providers. Twenty-five studies from fourteen different countries reported descriptive findings of different versions of SAQ in a variety of settings. Most studies were conducted in primary health care centres, out-of-hours clinics, nursing homes and general practice focusing on greatly varying populations. One study was conducted in home care. Three studies investigated variance of SAQ scores. Only five studies used SAQ to assess the effects of interventions/events. These studies evaluated the effect of electronic medical record implementation, a comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program or COVID-19.Conclusion The synthesis demonstrated that SAQ is valid for use in primary care, but it is important to adapt and validate the questionnaire to the specific setting and participants under investigation. Moreover, differences in SAQ factor scores were related to a variety of descriptive factors, that should be considered in future studies More studies, especially variance and intervention studies, are warranted in primary care.Trial registration This systematic review was not registered in any register.

Exploring the relationship between simulation-based team training and sick leave among healthcare professionals: a cohort study across multiple hospital sites

OBJECTIVE

Burnout and mental illness are frequent among healthcare professionals, leading to increased sick leave. Simulation-based team training has been shown to improve job satisfaction and mental health among healthcare professionals. This study seeks to investigate the relationship between simulation-based team training and sick leave.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING AND INTERVENTION

Five Danish hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 15 751 individuals were screened for eligibility. To meet the eligibility criteria, individuals had to be employed in the same group (intervention or control) for the whole study period. A total of 14 872 individuals were eligible for analysis in the study.

INTERVENTION

From 2017 to 2019, a simulation-based team training intervention was implemented at two hospital sites. Three hospital sites served as the control group.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Data on sick leave from 2015 to 2020 covered five hospital sites. Using a difference-in-difference analysis, the rate of sick leave was compared across hospital sites (intervention vs control) and time periods (before vs after intervention).

RESULTS

Significant alterations in sick leave were evident when comparing the intervention and control groups. When comparing groups over time, the increase in sick leave was -0.3% (95% CI -0.6% to -0.0%) lower in the intervention group than in the control group. The difference-in-difference for the complete case analysis showed that this trend remained consistent, with analysis indicating a comparable lower increase in sick leave by -0.7% (95% CI -1.3% to -0.1%) in the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

The increase in sick leave rate was statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, implying that simulation-based team training could serve as a protective factor against sick leave. However, when investigating this simulation intervention over 5 years, other potential factors may have influenced sick leave, so caution is required when interpreting the results.