↓ Skip to main content

Assessing health-care providers’ readiness for reporting quality and patient safety indicators at primary health-care centres in Lebanon: a national cross-sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Assessing health-care providers’ readiness for reporting quality and patient safety indicators at primary health-care centres in Lebanon: a national cross-sectional survey
Published in
Human Resources for Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0031-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohamad Alameddine, Shadi Saleh, Nabil Natafgi

Abstract

Successful endorsement of quality indicators hinges on the readiness and acceptability of care providers for those measures. This paper aims to assess the readiness of care providers in the primary health-care sector in Lebanon for the implementation of quality and patient safety indicators. A cross-sectional survey methodology was utilized to gather information from 943 clinical care providers working at 123 primary health-care centres in Lebanon. The questionnaire included two sections: the first assessed four readiness dimensions (appropriateness, management support, efficacy, and personal valence) of clinical providers to use quality and safety indicators using the Readiness for Organization Change (ROC) scale, and the second section assessed the safety attitude at the primary care centre utilizing the Agency of Health Research and Quality (AHRQ) Safety Attitude Questionnaire (SAQ)-Ambulatory version. Although two thirds (66 %) of respondents indicated readiness for implementation of quality and patient safety indicators in their centres, there appear to be differences by professional group. Physicians displayed the lowest scores on all readiness dimensions except for personal valence which was the lowest among nurses (60 %). In contrast, allied health professionals displayed the highest scores across all readiness dimensions. Generally, respondents reflected a positive safety attitude climate in the centres. Yet, there remain a few areas of concern related to punitive culture (only 12.8 % agree that staff should not be punished for reported errors/incidents), continuity of care (41.1 % believe in the negative consequences of lack in continuity of care process), and resources (48.1 % believe that the medical equipment they have are adequate). Providers with the highest SAQ score had 2.7, 1.7, 7 and 2.4 times the odds to report a higher readiness on the appropriateness, efficacy, management and personal valence ROC subscales, respectively (P value <0.01). Nurses displayed relatively lower odds of readiness across all other ROC subscales as compared to all other providers. Health-care providers at the primary health care (PHC) centres in Lebanon are ready to engage in employing quality and patient safety indicators. This is a key finding given the active efforts by the MoPH to strengthen the quality culture in the PHC sector through various strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 42 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 28%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 22%
Social Sciences 8 17%
Unspecified 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Other 5 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2015.
All research outputs
#2,709,636
of 5,131,029 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#354
of 398 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,132
of 172,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#33
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,131,029 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 398 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 172,491 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.