Health care providers (HCPs) have always been a common target of stigmatization during widespread infections and COVID-19 is not an exception. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of stigmatization during the COVID-19 pandemic among HCPs in seven different countries using the Stigma COVID-19 Healthcare Providers tool (S19-HCPs). Cross-sectional. The S19-HCPs is a self-administered online survey (16-item) developed and validated by the research team. The participants were invited to complete an online survey. Data collection started from June–July 2020 using a convenience sample of HCPs from Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Philippines, and Kuwait. A total number of 1726 participants were included in the final analysis. The majority of the study participants were Jordanians (22%), followed by Kuwaitis (19%), Filipinos (18%) and the lowest participants were Indonesians (6%). Other nationalities were Iraqis, Saudis, and Egyptians with 15%, 11% and 9% respectively. Among the respondents, 57% have worked either in a COVID-19 designated facility or in a quarantine center and 78% claimed that they had received training for COVID-19. Statistical significance between COVID-19 stigma and demographic variables were found in all aspect of the S19-HCPs. The findings of this study demonstrated high levels of stigmatization against HCPs in all the included seven countries. On the other hand, they are still perceived positively by their communities and in their utmost, highly motivated to care for COVID-19 patients. Educational and awareness programs could have a crucial role in the solution of stigmatization problems over the world.

Purpose: To investigate the organizational culture, assess the quality of care, and measure their association with a transformational/transactional leadership style in six hospitals. Materials and Methods: We used cross-sectional and retrospective quantitative approaches in government-sponsored secondary-care hospitals. A sample of 1626 was drawn from a frame of 9863 healthcare workers in six hospitals. Followers were surveyed using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and the Organizational Description Questionnaire. We reviewed and analyzed one year (2012) of quarterly and annual quality indicators from the hospitals. Data were analyzed using suitable statistical analyses. Results: We collected 1626 responses from six hospitals. 66.4% to 87.1% of participants in each hospital identified their hospital’s organizational culture as transformational, whereas 41 out of 48 departments were identified as having a transformational culture. The percentage of participants at each hospital rating their leader and organizational culture as transformational ranged from 60.5% to 80.4%. The differences between leadership style and organizational culture were statistically significant for four of the hospitals. For most of the quality indicators, there was a positive, but nonsignificant, correlation with leadership style. Conclusion: Leaders define and influence organizational culture. The prevailing transformational leadership style creates and maintains a transformational organizational culture. The effect of transformational leadership on the quality of care delivered by the organization was measured in this study, and showed a positive and nonsignificant relationship between generic quality indicators and the transformational style.

Background: Assessments of the culture surrounding patient safety can inform healthcare settings on how their structures and processes impact patient outcomes. This study investigated patient safety culture in Primary Health Care Centres in Kuwait, and benchmarked the findings against regional and international results. This study also examined the association between predictors and outcomes of patient safety culture in these settings. Methods: This cross-sectional quantitative study used the Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture. The study was targeted at staff of all the Primary Health Care Centres in Kuwait with at least one year of experience. Data were analysed using SPSS 23 at a significance level of ≤ .05. Univariate (means, standard deviations, frequencies, percentages) and bivariate (chi-squared tests, student t-tests, ANOVA F-tests, Kruskal–Wallis tests, Spearman’s correlation) analyses provided an overview of participant socio-demographics and the association between patient safety culture composites and outcomes. We undertook a multivariate regression analysis to predict the determinants of patient safety culture. Results were benchmarked against similar local (Kuwait, 2014), regional (Yemen, 2015) and international (US, 2018) studies. Results: The responses of 6602 employees from 94 centres were included in the study, with an overall response rate of 78.7%. The survey revealed Teamwork (87.8% positive ratings) and Organisational Learning (78.8%) as perceived areas of strength. Communication about Error (57.7%), Overall Perceptions of Patient Safety and Quality (57.4%), Communication Openness (54.4%), Owner/Managing Partner/Leadership Support for Patient Safety (53.8%) and Work Pressure and Pace (28.4%) were identified as areas requiring improvement. Benchmarking analysis revealed that Kuwait centres are performing at benchmark levels or better on four and six composites when compared to international and regional findings, respectively. Regression modelling highlighted significant predictions regarding patient safety outcomes and composites. Conclusions: This is the first major study addressing the culture of patient safety in public Primary Health Care Centres regionally. Improving patient safety culture is critical for these centres to improve the quality and safety of the healthcare services they provide. The findings of this study can guide country-level strategies to develop the systems that govern patient safety practices.

Purpose: The growing importance of risk management programmes and practices in different industries has given rise to a new risk management approach, i.e. enterprise risk management. The purpose of this paper is to better understand the necessity, benefit, approaches and methodologies of managing risks in healthcare. It compares and contrasts between the traditional and enterprise risk management approaches within the healthcare context. In addition, it introduces bow tie methodology, a prospective risk assessment tool proposed by the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management as a visual risk management tool used in enterprise risk management. Design/methodology/approach: This is a critical review of published literature on the topics of governance, patient safety, risk management, enterprise risk management and bow tie, which aims to draw a link between them and find the benefits behind their adoption. Findings: Enterprise risk management is a generic holistic approach that extends the benefits of risk management programme beyond the traditional insurable hazards and/or losses. In addition, the bow tie methodology is a barrier-based risk analysis and management tool used in enterprise risk management for critical events related to the relevant day-to-day operations. It is a visual risk assessment tool which is used in many higher reliability industries. Nevertheless, enterprise risk management and bow ties are reported with limited use in healthcare. Originality/value: The paper suggests the applicability and usefulness of enterprise risk management to healthcare, and proposes the bow tie methodology as a proactive barrier-based risk management tool valid for enterprise risk management implementation in healthcare.