• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

围产期工作人员对其服务中安全与质量的认知。

Perinatal staff perceptions of safety and quality in their service.

作者信息

Sinni Suzanne V, Wallace Euan M, Cross Wendy M

机构信息

The Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University and MIMR-PHI Institute of Medical Research, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 28;14:591. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0591-4.

DOI:10.1186/s12913-014-0591-4
PMID:25430702
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4258038/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ensuring safe and appropriate service delivery is central to a high quality maternity service. With this in mind, over recent years much attention has been given to the development of evidence-based clinical guidelines, staff education and risk reporting systems. Less attention has been given to assessing staff perceptions of a service's safety and quality and what factors may influence that. In this study we set out to assess staff perceptions of safety and quality of a maternity service and to explore potential influences on service safety.

METHODS

The study was undertaken within a new low risk metropolitan maternity service in Victoria, Australia with a staffing profile comprising midwives (including students), neonatal nurses, specialist obstetricians, junior medical staff and clerical staff. In depth open-ended interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire were conducted with 23 staff involved in the delivery of perinatal care, including doctors, midwives, nurses, nursing and midwifery students, and clerical staff. Data were analyzed using naturalistic interpretive inquiry to identify emergent themes.

RESULTS

Staff unanimously reported that there were robust systems and processes in place to maintain safety and quality. Three major themes were apparent: (1) clinical governance, (2) dominance of midwives, (3) inter-professional relationships. Overall, there was a strong sense that, at least in this midwifery-led service, midwives had the greatest opportunity to be an influence, both positively and negatively, on the safe delivery of perinatal care. The importance of understanding team dynamics, particularly mutual respect, trust and staff cohesion, were identified as key issues for potential future service improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Senior staff, particularly midwives and neonatal nurses, play central roles in shaping team behaviors and attitudes that may affect the safety and quality of service delivery. We suggest that strategies targeting senior staff to enhance their performance in their roles, particularly in the training and teamwork role-modeling of the transitory junior workforce, are important for the development and maintenance of a high quality and safe maternity service.

摘要

背景

确保安全且恰当的服务提供是高质量产科服务的核心。鉴于此,近年来人们对循证临床指南、员工教育和风险报告系统的发展给予了诸多关注。而对于评估员工对服务安全性和质量的看法以及哪些因素可能影响这些看法的关注则较少。在本研究中,我们旨在评估员工对产科服务安全性和质量的看法,并探讨对服务安全的潜在影响因素。

方法

该研究在澳大利亚维多利亚州一家新的低风险都市产科服务机构内进行,其员工构成包括助产士(含学生)、新生儿护士、专科产科医生、初级医务人员和文职人员。我们使用半结构化问卷对23名参与围产期护理的员工进行了深度开放式访谈,这些员工包括医生、助产士、护士、护理和助产专业学生以及文职人员。采用自然主义解释性探究方法对数据进行分析,以确定浮现的主题。

结果

员工一致报告称,存在健全的系统和流程来维持安全性和质量。出现了三个主要主题:(1)临床治理;(2)助产士的主导地位;(3)跨专业关系。总体而言,大家强烈感觉到,至少在这个以助产士为主导的服务机构中,助产士对围产期护理的安全分娩有着最大的机会产生积极或消极的影响。理解团队动态,特别是相互尊重、信任和员工凝聚力的重要性,被确定为未来潜在服务改进的关键问题。

结论

高级员工,特别是助产士和新生儿护士,在塑造可能影响服务提供安全性和质量的团队行为和态度方面发挥着核心作用。我们建议,针对高级员工的策略,以提高他们在其角色中的表现,特别是在对过渡性初级员工的培训和团队合作示范方面,对于高质量和安全的产科服务的发展和维持至关重要。

相似文献

1
Perinatal staff perceptions of safety and quality in their service.围产期工作人员对其服务中安全与质量的认知。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 28;14:591. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0591-4.
2
Staffing in postnatal units: is it adequate for the provision of quality care? Staff perspectives from a state-wide review of postnatal care in Victoria, Australia.产后病房的人员配备:是否足以提供优质护理?来自澳大利亚维多利亚州全州产后护理审查的工作人员观点。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2006 Jul 4;6:83. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-83.
3
Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.基于母婴模拟学习的学生和教育工作者体验:定性证据协议的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694.
4
How do nurses and midwives perceive their preparedness for quality improvement and patient safety in practice? A cross-sectional national study in Ireland.护士和助产士如何看待自己在实践中做好质量改进和患者安全的准备?爱尔兰的一项全国性横断面研究。
Nurse Educ Today. 2019 May;76:125-130. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.01.025. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
5
A study of Iranian nurses' and midwives' knowledge, attitudes, and implementation of evidence-based practice: the time for change has arrived.一项关于伊朗护士和助产士循证实践的知识、态度及实施情况的研究:变革的时刻已经到来。
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2014 Oct;11(5):325-31. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12052. Epub 2014 Aug 5.
6
Assessment of the implementation of the model of integrated and humanised midwifery health services in Chile.智利综合人性化助产健康服务模式实施情况评估
Midwifery. 2016 Apr;35:53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2016.01.018. Epub 2016 Feb 8.
7
Midwifery defined by physicians, nurses and midwives: the birth of a consensus?医生、护士和助产士对助产的定义:共识的诞生?
CMAJ. 1994 Mar 1;150(5):691-7.
8
Organising safe and sustainable care in alongside midwifery units: Findings from an organisational ethnographic study.在助产机构中组织安全且可持续的护理:一项组织人种志研究的结果
Midwifery. 2018 Oct;65:26-34. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2018.06.023. Epub 2018 Jul 4.
9
Health-care professionals' views about safety in maternity services: a qualitative study.医疗保健专业人员对产科服务安全性的看法:一项定性研究。
Midwifery. 2009 Feb;25(1):21-31. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2008.11.004. Epub 2008 Dec 17.
10
Engaging rural nurses in the policy development process.让乡村护士参与政策制定过程。
Contemp Nurse. 2016 Dec;52(6):677-685. doi: 10.1080/10376178.2016.1221323. Epub 2016 Aug 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Healthcare professionals' perceptions of patient safety for the woman in childbirth in Sweden - An interview study.医护人员对瑞典分娩女性的患者安全感知 - 一项访谈研究。
Nurs Open. 2019 Dec 18;7(2):642-649. doi: 10.1002/nop2.435. eCollection 2020 Mar.
2
Estimating the incidence and the economic burden of third and fourth-degree obstetric tears in the English NHS: an observational study using propensity score matching.评估英国国民医疗服务体系中三度和四度产科撕裂伤的发病率及经济负担:一项使用倾向评分匹配法的观察性研究
BMJ Open. 2017 Jun 12;7(6):e015463. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015463.

本文引用的文献

1
Can we teach core clinical obstetrics and gynaecology skills using low fidelity simulation in an interprofessional setting?我们能否在跨专业环境中使用低保真模拟来教授核心临床妇产科学技能?
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Dec;54(6):589-92. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12252. Epub 2014 Oct 11.
2
Is place of birth associated with mode of birth? The effect of hospital on caesarean section rates in a public metropolitan health service.出生地与分娩方式有关联吗?一家大都市公共卫生服务机构中医院对剖宫产率的影响。
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Feb;54(1):64-70. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12147. Epub 2013 Nov 13.
3
Safety culture in the maternity units: a census survey using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire.产房的安全文化:使用安全态度问卷进行的普查调查。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Sep 27;11:238. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-238.
4
Attitudes of the new generation of Canadian obstetricians: how do they differ from their predecessors?新一代加拿大产科医生的态度:与前辈相比有何不同?
Birth. 2011 Jun;38(2):129-39. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00462.x. Epub 2011 Mar 10.
5
Overview of progress in patient safety.患者安全进展概述。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jan;204(1):5-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.11.001.
6
Oiling the wheels of intensive care to reduce "machine friction": the best way to improve outcomes?为重症监护加油以减少“机器摩擦”:改善预后的最佳方法?
Crit Care Med. 2010 Oct;38(10 Suppl):S642-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181f20691.
7
Viewing health care delivery as science: challenges, benefits, and policy implications.将医疗保健服务视为科学:挑战、益处和政策影响。
Health Serv Res. 2010 Oct;45(5 Pt 2):1508-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01144.x. Epub 2010 Aug 2.
8
From artefact to effect: the organising effects of artefacts on teams.从人工制品到效应:人工制品对团队的组织效应。
J Health Organ Manag. 2010;24(4):412-27. doi: 10.1108/14777261011065011.
9
Improving teamwork to reduce surgical mortality.改善团队协作以降低手术死亡率。
JAMA. 2010 Oct 20;304(15):1721-2. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1542.
10
Measuring preventable harm: helping science keep pace with policy.衡量可预防的伤害:助力科学跟上政策步伐。
JAMA. 2009 Mar 25;301(12):1273-5. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.388.