A Mixed-Method Evaluation of Public Perceptions Regarding Patient Communication following a Patient Safety Breach Open Access

Schneider, Amy Kathryn (2011)

Permanent URL: https://etd.library.emory.edu/concern/etds/tq57nr377?locale=en
Published

Abstract

Background:Unsafe injection practices in healthcare settings most often result in the notification of potentially affected patients. Few studies have highlighted public perceptions ofthe problem of unsafe injections, their perceived commonality and risk, as well as the information to be included within a patient notification letter. Through secondary data analysis, the Health Belief Model was used as a framework for evaluating public perceptions regarding patient notification following identification of unsafe injection practices.

Methods: Six focus groups were conducted during Fall 2009, with residents of Atlanta and New York City. Two groups within each city were given a sample patient notification letter for a portion of the questions while the third groups in both cities were asked to answer the questions
without a notification letter.

Results: A total of 53 individuals participated in the six focus groups; only two had ever heard of the term "safe injection practices." After being provided with a brief definition, most participants felt that unsafe injections were slightly more common in a hospital setting (Likert-scale of 1[not at all] to 5 [very]; Mean=3.30) than in a doctor's office (Mean=2.13) citing themes such as greater workload. Participants somewhat agreed that they felt at risk of receiving unsafe injections (Likert-scale of 1 [strongly disagree] to 5 [strongly agree]; Mean=2.75) mainly because they felt there is always a chance. After the identification of unsafe injection practices, participants preferred to be notified via phone, letter, email, or face-to-face from the facility where the incident occurred. Over 25 different types of information were cited as necessary elements within a patient notification letter including: corrective actions by the facility, course of action for patients, and assurance of medical coverage.


Conclusion: The results of this study provide evidence for the implementation of patient safety programs highlighting safe injection practices to increase knowledge and awareness of patients on this growing issue. Additional programming should also focus on increasing perceived susceptibility and severity of unsafe injections. Further discussion by public health professionals should focus on determining what information should be included in a patient notification letter to decrease barriers and increase benefits of testing.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

Injection Safety........................................................................................................................... 1

Patient Notifications..................................................................................................................... 4

Evaluation of Patient Notifications................................................................................................... 5

Health Belief Model....................................................................................................................... 8

Limitations of Previous Research.................................................................................................... 11

Purpose/Research Questions......................................................................................................... 11

Methods................................................................................................................................... 13

Research Design......................................................................................................................... 13

Participants & Recruitment............................................................................................................ 13

Procedure................................................................................................................................... 13

Measures.................................................................................................................................... 14

Analyses.....................................................................................................................................15

Results ...................................................................................................................................... 17

Participant Demographics.............................................................................................................. 17

Methods of Preferred Health Communication..................................................................................... 17

General Knowledge and Perceptions of Commonality and Risk................................................................18

Patient Notification Letters........................................................................................................... 22

Examining the Letter/Content for a Letter........................................................................................ 24

Actions Taken after Receiving a Letter........................................................................................... 30

Discussion................................................................................................................................. 31

Tables ...................................................................................................................................... 47

Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 56

References ................................................................................................................................ 59

Appendix................................................................................................................................... 64

About this Master's Thesis

Rights statement
  • Permission granted by the author to include this thesis or dissertation in this repository. All rights reserved by the author. Please contact the author for information regarding the reproduction and use of this thesis or dissertation.
School
Department
Degree
Submission
Language
  • English
Research Field
Keyword
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor
Committee Members
Last modified

Primary PDF

Supplemental Files