Background: Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) professionals, including managers and advisors, often face exclusion from key organizational decision-making processes, limiting their influence on workplace safety improvements. While prior research highlights the technical aspects of OHS roles, little attention has been given to the strategic approaches professionals use to navigate organizational challenges and influence safety systems effectively. Methods:This study was conducted through in-depth interviews with twelve OHS professionals from public and private sector organizations. Participants, comprising six OHS managers and six OHS advisors, had at least six years of experience. Data collection involved semi-structured and structured interviews, where participants provided insights into their responsibilities, strategic approaches, and organizational positioning. Thematic analysis using NVIVO software categorized strategies based on existing frameworks while identifying new approaches. An impact evaluation framework with seven levels was applied to assess the effectiveness of these strategies. Results: OHS professionals were motivated by personal experiences, a commitment to workplace safety, and the desire to drive organizational change. Their primary responsibilities included advising management, ensuring regulatory compliance, and maintaining OHS management systems. While most professionals operated at both strategic and operational levels, their focus was primarily on organizational and human-centered dimensions rather than technical aspects. Strategic approaches varied, with some relying on traditional compliance-based strategies, while others employed adaptive tactics, such as the “political reflective navigator” model, to influence workplace safety culture. Conclusion: The study highlights the diverse roles and strategies employed by OHS professionals to enhance workplace safety. Despite their marginalization in decision-making, those who adopt flexible, advocacy-driven strategies can exert significant influence on organizational safety practices. Future research should explore additional contextual factors affecting OHS professionals' strategic efficacy, particularly in different industry settings.

Background: Patient satisfaction is a critical measure of healthcare quality, reflecting patients’ experiences and the extent to which their needs and expectations are met. While global studies have identified various determinants of satisfaction, research in some regions, particularly in the Gulf, remains limited. This study investigates the determinants of patient satisfaction in primary healthcare settings, focusing on socio-demographic factors and dimensions of care. Methods: This study was conducted among patients receiving services at primary healthcare centers. A systematic sampling approach yielded 398 completed questionnaires. The instrument assessed six dimensions of satisfaction: interpersonal care, technical competence, accessibility, convenience, availability, and overall satisfaction. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, t-tests, ANOVA, and exploratory factor analysis, with internal consistency measured using Cronbach’s alpha. Results: The mean satisfaction score was 35.2 (SD = 6.8). Married patients and those with college degrees reported significantly higher satisfaction. Factor analysis revealed interpersonal care, accessibility, and technical competence as the most influential dimensions. Communication quality and the time spent with healthcare providers were strongly associated with satisfaction. Approximately 64.8% of participants reported high overall satisfaction. Conclusion: Effective communication and patient-centered interactions are key determinants of satisfaction in primary care. Addressing gaps in provider-patient communication and ensuring sufficient consultation time can enhance patient experiences. These findings emphasize the need for ongoing assessment and improvement of healthcare delivery to meet diverse patient expectations

Background: Ensuring a strong patient safety culture is essential for the delivery of high-quality healthcare. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), inadequate and unsafe medical care is responsible for nearly 60% of fatalities, many of which are preventable. A positive patient safety culture fosters trust, openness, and performance improvement. Understanding healthcare workers' perceptions of safety practices is a crucial step in enhancing patient safety culture. Methods: This study was conducted using a self-administered online survey among 1000 healthcare professionals in a major general hospital. The Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) was utilized, assessing 42 items across 12 dimensions of patient safety culture. 700 responses were analyzed. Descriptive statistics, positive response percentages, and multiple linear regression were used for data analysis. Results: Overall, 76.9% of respondents rated the patient safety grade as excellent or very good. The patient safety culture composite score was 74.2%, with strengths in areas like "Teamwork within units" (91.3%) and "Organizational learning" (88.4%). However, areas needing improvement included "Staffing" (49.4%) and "Non-punitive response to errors" (53.1%). A majority of respondents (67.1%) had not reported any safety events in the past year. Female healthcare workers and nurses reported lower perceptions of patient safety compared to male and physician respondents. Additionally, work area/unit influenced perceptions, with emergency and surgery departments having better safety perceptions. Conclusion: The study highlights a generally positive perception of patient safety culture in the hospital, though areas such as staffing and non-punitive responses to errors require improvement. Gender, position, and work area/unit were significant predictors of safety perceptions. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions to enhance patient safety culture, with a focus on improving staffing and fostering a non-punitive environment for reporting errors.

Background: Effective communication is a cornerstone of high-quality healthcare, empowering patients to make informed decisions, adopt recommended behaviors, and adhere to treatment plans. However, challenges arise due to the complexity of medical information and variations in patient comprehension. This systematic review evaluates the impact of physicians’ information-delivery strategies on patient outcomes, focusing on recall and behavioral changes. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from an initial pool of 9,423 abstracts and 175 full-text articles. Studies included interventions using defined communication strategies compared to control conditions, with outcomes measured as patient recall and behavior. Data were synthesized qualitatively due to heterogeneity in intervention methods and outcome measures. Results: The review analyzed 17 RCTs involving 8,256 participants. Information recall improved in 7 out of 10 interventions, with structured delivery and visual aids being particularly effective. Behavioral outcomes showed significant improvements in 8 of 9 studies, driven by strategies like persuasive framing, tailored explanations, and patient-centered approaches. Notable effects included reduced smoking rates, weight loss, and increased treatment adherence. However, the relationship between trust and recall presented nuanced findings. Conclusion: Deliberate communication strategies enhance patient recall and promote health-related behaviors. Structuring information, using visual aids, and applying persuasive techniques yield measurable benefits. Future research should validate these findings in real-world settings, refine cognitive aid strategies, and explore the dynamics of trust and engagement in physician-patient interactions

Background: Work engagement is critical for nurse performance and well-being, particularly in specialized areas such as radiology, where occupational hazards like radiation exposure and high-stress environments are prevalent. Despite the increasing demand for radiological nursing care, many nurses express reluctance to work in radiology due to health concerns and limited support systems. Methods: This study was conducted among nurses working in radiology departments of cancer care hospitals . Data were collected using a demographic questionnaire, the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), and a survey assessing perceptions of radiation safety. Descriptive and multiple regression analyses were performed to identify factors influencing work engagement. Results: Out of 200 participants, the mean UWES score was 54.3 (SD = 18.4), reflecting moderate work engagement. Absorption scored slightly higher than vigor and dedication. Key predictors of engagement included nurses’ preference for radiology assignments and the availability of radiation exposure consultation services. While nurses reported confidence in workplace safety measures, gaps in consultation services and education about long-term risks were noted. Demographic factors, such as age and professional position, also played a role in engagement levels. Conclusion: Work engagement among radiology nurses is influenced by a complex interplay of individual preferences and organizational factors. Enhancing consultation services, providing targeted training, and implementing specialized support programs are essential strategies for fostering engagement in high-stress environments. Further research is needed to develop tailored interventions to address these challenges and improve outcomes in radiology nursing.

Background: Saudi Arabia has made significant progress in enhancing its health security through robust preparedness and response mechanisms to address epidemics and biological threats. Given its strategic location, dense population centers, and the annual influx of pilgrims for Hajj and Umrah, the country faces unique challenges in disease prevention and control. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of resilient healthcare systems, rapid response frameworks, and digital health technologies. This study evaluates Saudi Arabia's health security strategies, focusing on preparedness, public awareness, and resource availability. Methods: A mixed-methods research design was employed, combining quantitative surveys with qualitative expert interviews. The study involved 250 survey respondents and 50 interviews with public health officials, healthcare professionals, and academic researchers. Data were collected through structured questionnaires, epidemiological trend analysis, in-depth interviews, and policy document reviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative data were thematically coded using NVivo software. Results: The findings revealed that 85% of participants had moderate to high awareness of epidemic preparedness strategies, though 15% reported low awareness. Half of the respondents expressed confidence in the health system's response capabilities, while 25% were not confident. Resource availability was inconsistent, with 50% reporting occasional shortages. Key challenges included insufficient public awareness (35%), lack of medical resources (25%), and coordination gaps (20%). Suggested improvements included more public awareness campaigns (45%) and increased healthcare funding (25%). Conclusion: Saudi Arabia has established a strong foundation for health security, but gaps remain in public awareness, resource allocation, and inter-sectoral coordination. Strengthening public education, ensuring consistent medical supplies, and enhancing collaboration between stakeholders are critical for future preparedness. The study highlights the need for continuous improvement and alignment with global health security standards to mitigate the impact of epidemics and biological threats effectively.