Background: Poorly organized health systems with inadequate leadership limit the development of the robust safety cultures capable of preventing consequential adverse events. Although safety culture has been studied in hospitals worldwide, the relationship between clinician perceptions about patient safety and their actual clinical practices has received little attention. Despite the need for mixed methods studies to achieve a deeper understanding of safety culture, there are few studies providing comparisons of hospitals in different countries. Purpose: This study compared the safety culture of hospitals from the perspective of nurses in four European countries, including Croatia, Hungary, Spain, and Sweden. Design: A comparative mixed methods study with a convergent parallel design. Methods: Data collection included a survey, participant interviews, and workplace observations. The sample was nurses working in the internal medicine, surgical, and emergency departments of two public hospitals from each country. Survey data (n = 538) was collected with the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) and qualitative date was collected through 24 in-depth interviews and 147 h of non-participant observation. Survey data was analyzed descriptively and inferentially, and content analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data. Results: The overall perception of safety culture for most dimensions was ‘adequate’ in Sweden and ‘adequate’ to ‘poor’ in the other countries with inconsistencies identified between survey and qualitative data. Although teamwork within units was the most positive dimension across countries, the qualitative data did not consistently demonstrate support, respect, and teamwork as normative attributes in Croatia and Hungary. Staffing and workload were identified as major areas for improvement across countries, although the nurse-to-patient ratios were the highest in Sweden, followed by Spain, Hungary, and Croatia. Conclusions: Despite all countries being part of the European Union, most safety culture dimensions require improvement, with few measured as good, and most deemed to be adequate to poor. Dimension level perceptions were at times incongruent across countries, as observed patient safety practices or interview perspectives were inconsistent with a positive safety culture. Differences between countries may be related to national culture or variability in health system structures permitted by the prevailing European Union health policy.

Background: There are relatively few qualitative studies concerning patient safety culture. Methods: We aimed to explore patient safety culture as perceived by the nursing staff in two public hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. A mixed-methods design was employed using a questionnaire, in-depth interviews, and non-participant observations. Results: Sixty-two percent of the nursing staff rated patient safety as “Acceptable” but was not higher because of work pressure and lack of resources as perceived by staff. “Teamwork within units” had the highest rate of positive responses, and “Staffing” had the lowest rate. Emergency units showed more negative results than the other two units. Conclusions: Safety incidents are not always reported due to fear of punishment, reflecting a lack of positive safety culture. It is necessary to design and implement strategies that promote a positive culture to avoid punitive responses and apply and evaluate these changes.

Background: The Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) is widely utilized in multiple languages across the world. Despite culture and language variations, research studies from Latin America use the Spanish language HSOPSC validated for Spain and the United States. Yet, these studies fail to report the translation method, cultural adaptation process, and the equivalence assessment strategy. As such, the psychometric properties of the HSOPSC are not well demonstrated for cross-cultural research in Latin America, including Peru. The purpose of this study was to develop a target-language HSOPSC for cross-cultural research in Peru that asks the same questions, in the same manner, with the same intended meaning, as the source instrument.Methods: This study used a mixed-methods approach adapted from the translation guideline recommended by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The 3-phase, 7-step process incorporated translation techniques, pilot testing, cognitive interviews, clinical participant review, and subject matter expert evaluation.Results: The instrument was translated and evaluated in 3 rounds of cognitive interview (CI). There were 37 problem items identified in round 1 (14 clarity, 12 cultural, 11 mixed); and resolved to 4 problems by round 3. The pilot-testing language clarity inter-rater reliability was S-CVI/Avg = 0.97 and S-CVI/UA = 0.86; and S-CVI/Avg = 0.96 and S-CVI/UA = 0.83 for cultural relevance. Subject matter expert agreement in matching items to the correct dimensions was substantially equivalent (Kappa = 0.72). Only 1 of 12 dimensions had a low Kappa (0.39), borderline fair to moderate. The remaining dimensions performed well (7 = almost perfect, 2 = substantial, and 2 = moderate).Conclusions: The HSOPSC instrument developed for Peru was markedly different from the other Spanish-language versions. The resulting items were equivalent in meaning to the source, despite the new language and different cultural context. The analysis identified negatively worded items were problematic for target-language translation. With the limited literature about negatively worded items in the context of cross-cultural research, further research is necessary to evaluate this finding and the recommendation to include negatively worded items in instruments. This study demonstrates cross-cultural research with translated instruments should adhere to established guidelines, with cognitive interviews, based on evidence-based strategies.

Purpose: The Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) is a rigorously designed tool for measuring inpatient safety culture. The purpose of this paper is to develop a cross-cultural HSOPSC for Hungary and determine its strengths and weaknesses. Design/methodology/approach: The original US version was translated and adapted using existing guidelines. Healthcare workers (n=371) including nurses, physicians and other healthcare staff from six Hungarian hospitals participated. Answers were analyzed using exploratory factor analyses and reliability tests. Findings: Positive responses in all dimensions were lower in Hungary than in the USA. Half the participants considered their work area “acceptable” regarding patient safety. Healthcare staff worked in “crisis mode,” trying to accomplish too much and too quickly. The authors note that a “blame culture” does not facilitate patient safety improvements in Hungary. Practical implications: The results provide valuable information for promoting a more positive patient safety culture in Hungary and for evaluating future strategies to improve patient safety. Originality/value: Introducing a validated scale to measure patient safety culture in Hungary improves healthcare quality.