Search

Aim: To determine the factors related with the perception of feeling safe during pre-hospital emergency care., Methods: A multi-centred, cross-sectional study. Data collection from April 2021 to March 2022, in the Centro de Emergencias Sanitarias 061 (Andalusia, Spain)., Inclusion Criteria: witnesses of health care by emergency medical services., Exclusion Criteria: minors, or communication barriers., Outcome Variable: Witness Perceived Safety Scale ESPT10. The variables studied were related with sociodemographic data, the request for health care, the patient, the hospital transfer and patient safety incidents. A multivariate linear regression model was constructed for the dependent variable. The study followed STROBE statement., Results: Responses were obtained from 1400 witnesses. The linear regression model showed that the score on the scale increased as the witnesses felt more satisfied (B = 1.302; p < 0.001). On the contrary, the score was lower when the witness reported a patient safety incident (B = -2.856; p < 0.001 and B = -3.166; p < 0.001), or when the assistance took place in a public space (B = -0.722; p = 0.017)., Conclusions: The level of satisfaction, the occurrence of a patient safety incident, and the place of health care are related factors with the perception of the witnesses. The Witness Perceived Safety Scale ESPT10 could be considered a valid and useful patient safety indicator., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To identify factors related to patients' feeling of safety during prehospital emergencies., Material and Methods: Descriptive, multicenter cross-sectional study in the context of "061" emergency response services of Andalusia, Spain. Data were collected from April 2021 to March 2022. Patients attended and transported by emergency responders were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if they were minors or in an altered state of consciousness, or had cognitive impairment or any barrier to communication. We calculated that a minimum sample size of 644 patients would be required. The outcome variable was the score on a 16-item scale of patient-perceived safety (ESP16, as abbreviated in Spanish). Sociodemographic, emergency service response, patient, and hospital transfer variables were studied in relation to ESP16 score. We also collected patient safety incident reports. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze associations between the independent variables and the dependent outcome variable. Guidelines for Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) were followed., Results: We received 1756 responses. The mean (SD) ESP16 score was 77.7 (5.6); the median score was 80. The β􀀃 coefficients derived from the linear regression model were as follows for the variables associated with the ESP16 score: 2.799 (P .001) for satisfaction; -6.097 (P .001) for incident reports of errors, falls, harm, or injury; -2.742 (P .001) for reports of any other incident during attendance; 2.538 (P = .001) for use of the transport protocol; 1.157 (P .001) for type of emergency transport used; 0.726 (P = .014) for a cardiology diagnosis; and 1.195 (P = .003) for pain intensity., Conclusion: Patients' perception of safety is very high, as reflected by level of satisfaction, incident reports, use of a transport protocol, means of transport used, diagnosis, and pain level.

Aims: To systematically describe the factors influencing the perception of feeling safe among patients receiving pre‐hospital emergency care. Background: Patient safety is a top priority worldwide. Little is known about how patients perceive safety during emergency health care and what the related factors are. Design: A mixed‐methods systematic review. Methods: Six databases were searched to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were as follows: studies with patients of any age, framed in pre‐hospital emergency care settings, referring to patient safety, addressing the perception of safety, and with a quantitative or qualitative research design. Exclusion criteria were as follows: conference records, abstracts, supplements, letters, editorials and reviews. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists. A convergent integrated approach was followed according to the JBI methodology. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022306337). PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed in reporting this review. Results: Among the 5223 records identified, the whole texts of 35 articles were reviewed. Ten studies were relevant to the research question. Seven followed a qualitative methodology, with interviews or focus group. Three involved a quantitative methodology, with questionnaires or validated measures. The 74 findings were organised into 11 categories and then grouped into four dimensions: 'receiving a satisfying response from healthcare professionals when I need it', 'EMS personnel's professional competence', 'the variable and unfamiliar settings of pre‐hospital emergencies', and 'patients' personal characteristics'. Conclusions: The perception of safety is influenced by many factors, which can be grouped into four independent dimensions. Quantitative and qualitative studies can provide us with complementary findings. Relevance to Clinical Practice: Awareness of these factors enables us to act upon them. When patients feel safe their health outcomes improve, their anxiety decreases and they collaborate more actively. No Patient or Public Contribution: Patients and caregivers shared their experiences in the articles included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: To determine the feelings of safety among patients taken to hospital after requesting urgent care, based on their experiences and those of their carers and prehospital emergency care professionals. Background: Little research has been performed into the perception of safety in prehospital emergency care settings worldwide, from either the perspective of the patients or from that of healthcare professionals. Design: Exploratory qualitative study using focus groups in Spain. Methods: The participants were patients that requested care through the emergency telephone service, their carers and the professionals of the emergency care teams. The structured sampling design was based on an intentional, nonprobability selection following pragmatic criteria. Seven groups of patients/carers and two groups of professionals were formed (65 participants). The recordings were fully transcribed before their validation and codes were assigned to ensure anonymity. The ATLAS.ti software was used for the analysis. The authors took into account the COREQ checklist for qualitative studies. Findings: Neither group provided a clear definition of the meaning of feeling safe. It appeared easier to give examples that had a positive or negative influence on their perception of feeling safe. During the analysis of the discourse, six categories were detected after grouping the related codes. Conclusions: For most of the patients' feeling of being safe or very safe arose from the perception of calmness, trust and protection. Defining the perception of safety was not easy. The factors with the greatest effect on feeling safe were related to Information and communication, Person‐centred care and Professional competency, without losing sight of other factors such as Accessibility and response times of the emergency teams, Equipment and Healthcare setting. Relevance to clinical practice: The findings could be used as a knowledge base in future research and for implementing procedures for improving perceptions of safety among patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]