Patient safety : delivering cost-contained, high quality, person-centered, and safe healthcare

World Health Organization defines patient safety as the absence of preventable harm and the prevention of errors/adverse events in healthcare (1). Despite stakeholders’ unanimous consideration that patient safety is a vital principle of healthcare delivery, it remains a concern across health systems worldwide. Across the continuum of healthcare, every process is potentially subjected to adverse events, which may originate from faults/errors in clinical and operational practices, products, procedures, or systems. This Research Topic reflects the complexity facing patient safety. It also reflects on the challenges involved in delivering cost-contained, high quality, person-centered, ethically sound, and safe healthcare. The contributions project the complexity and multidimensionality of patient safety by highlighting its facets. These include healthcare managers’ and leaders’ role in prioritizing safety climate for better patient outcomes, and the importance of innovation and new technologies in medicine to drive the patient safety agenda, which in turn leads to the debate of economic efficiency by containing costs through errorminimization and waste reduction. The topic discusses the use of complementary and alternative therapies, as well as over-the-counter drugs—which a closer look reveals that these day-to-day practices cannot be ignored. Patient safety also depends on smart decision-making processes and ethical provider-patient relationships. The articles can be grouped into: (i) the role of leadership in ensuring safety climate and clinical performance; (ii) economic efficiency, innovation, and new technologies; (iii) complementary and alternative medicine; (iv) decision-making; and (v) ethics. Teuma Custo et al. analyze themediating role ofmanagerial safety practices and priority of safety in the relationship between safety climate and safety performance in intensive care. Their results highlight the suitability of safety procedures, as well as the saliency of the clarity and unambiguity of clinical/managerial information flow. The leader’s role is that of being visibly supportive (2) as a safety referent and change agent by prioritizing safety. Safety leaders need to emerge so as to ensure healthcare organizations’ ongoing commitment to patient safety.peer-reviewe

Employee Acceptance of Use: A Precondition for Enhancing Therapy Effectiveness, Patient Safety, and Economic Efficiency

Introduction: Fromthe workplace engineering sciences, it is evident that work efficiency, measured by the criteria efficiency and effectiveness of therapy, economy and patient safety, is determined mainly by staff acceptance of new technology and reengineered workflows. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to ascertain and assess differences in terms of the acceptance of alternative types of prosthesis instrument configurations, oriented around the research question: “Which product features and process effects determine a high level of employee acceptance of use?” Materials and Methods: This study is designed as a before-and-after comparison, based on the usability engineering approach. In the first study phase, 46 employees participating in the process of providing instruments for a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure were asked to examine the current working situation, using a standard instrumentation set, in terms of instrument handling, work burden, proneness to errors, patient risks, process efficiency, and effectiveness. In the second study phase, 20 weeks after having implemented a size-specific instrumentation set, the same 46 individuals were surveyed on the identical questions. Additionally, in both study phases the time needed to perform the sub-processes related to instrumentation logistics inside the operating room (OR) was measured, in order to identify process efficiency and cost-saving effects. Results: By using standard sets only 30% perceived a need for improvement. After 20 weeks, only 8% of the employees were satisfied with the previous equipment and 69% regarded the standard set as being relatively error-prone, endangering patient safety. In addition, 85% regarded the effectiveness of the standard process as limited. Finally, 75% considered the effectiveness of the reengineered process to be significantly higher, and 69% drew attention to the reduction of handling disadvantages. Furthermore, the time needed for instrumentation logistics inside the OR estimated at about 13min less when using size-specific sets. This effect on process efficiency cost savings or the generation of additional revenue by performing additional procedures. Based on these findings, an ergonomic decision-making model has been developed. Conclusion: Innovative medical products such as size-specific instrumentation sets contribute to lower procedure costs and improved process efficiency in the operating room (OR). However, employee motivation to use a new technology as part of an optimized workflow organization, is crucial to achieving an enhanced level of effectiveness, efficiency and patient safety. Hence, it is advisable to enhance change-management efforts in order to reduce resistance to change and ensure the new technology is successful