Search

Background and Originality: Patient safety is a very important component of quality which is often emphasised by health care managers and policymakers; however, its integration in national health policies and organisational measures is not self-evident. This paper explores how frequently Slovenian Community Health Centres (CHCs) report on patient safety and whether their reporting is consistent with the OECD definition of patient safety. The originality of this research is finding the actual value of patient safety for Slovenian CHC independently of official statements at national and organisational levels. Method: A qualitative descriptive analysis of the publicly available annual reports of twenty-six Slovenian CHCs with an integrated management system was conducted. Thematic analysis was applied to the term "safety" and related terms ("harm", "adverse" for adverse events, etc.). The frequency of these terms was reported, and the context of the words was explained. Results: In the annual reports, 11 different keywords related to safety, harm and adverse events were found, but only 6 keywords met the OECD definition of patient safety: patient safety education or preventive activities (n = 20); patient safety measures (n = 14); general healthcare safety (n = 3); drug safety, hygiene standards (n = 7); safety culture (n = 10); and risk management (harm prevention) (n = 8). These keywords were found in only 16 of 26 CHCs annual reports. Society: Patient safety is the responsibility of healthcare providers, both individuals and organisations. The social responsibility of CHCs is to report on patient safety in their annual reports, create a culture of safety, and take corrective action when necessary because their mission is to contribute to a higher quality of life for patients and society as a whole. This research shows that this is not always the case, even for CHCs with an integrated management system - not all have publicly available annual reports. The research is an incentive for all CHCs, not just CHCs with an integrated management system, to create a culture of safety, report on patient safety and learn from mistakes by developing safety protocols. Limitations / further research: The research was limited to CHCs with an integrated management system (n = 34) and publicly available annual reports (n = 26). It is crucial to conduct such research for all Slovenian CHCs and encourage them to report on patient safety. A true insight into the culture of patient safety must also include an analysis of the actions taken by the CHC management in recent years.

Research Question (RQ):Which are the most commonly monitored and gaged quality indicators in primary healthcare? Purpose:The purpose of this research is to study and research the grounds for quality indicators and measuring thereof in primary healthcare. Method:For this research we used the method of existing knowledge on quality indicators in healthcare and on monitored quality indicators in primary healthcare by systematical review of existing literature. We used triangulation to ensure better understanding of the problem, check and confirm data, and thus ensure the integrity of the research Results:Research showed the origin of quality indicators in primary healthcare and quality indicators which are measured by organizations in primary healthcare. Organization:Primary healthcare organizations will get an overview over most commonly monitored quality indicators in primary healthcare and thus the possibility to compare success and efficiency. Society:Data on measured quality indicators should be public. Users of primary healthcare services can choose the most successful healthcare organization based only on these data. Originality:A systematical review of the most commonly monitored and measured quality indicators in primary healthcare. Limitations/Future Research: The research is limited due to a smaller number of existing sources used and due to a smaller sample of interviewees. In the future it would be meaningful to research which quality indicators are measure by the majority of healthcare centers in Slovenia and establish a new model of monitored or obligatory quality indicators in primary healthcare based on the findings of this research.

Purpose: Purpose of the research is to clarify the basis, development and the state of the art of quality assurance systems at primary level of healthcare. Method: As a method, quality assurance in healthcare literature overview and analysis was used. Results: Research provided basic for the introduction and development of quality assurance as well as encouragement for further development of quality assurance in primary healthcare system Organization: institutions of primary healthcare system will be enabled to understand the quality assurance in healthcare systems in EU and Slovenia. Limitations/Future Research: Research is limited with relatively low amount of relevant sources. In the further research it would be necessary to define, which indicators shall be used in assessing the quality of primary healthcare services, and consequently to develop new model of requested indicators which shall be monitored in the primary healthcare systems