Trust, temporality and systems: How do patients understand patient safety in primary care? A qualitative study

Penny Rhodes, Stephen Campbell, Caroline Sanders

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction
Patient safety research has tended to focus on hospital settings, although most clinical encounters occur in primary care, and to emphasize practitioner errors, rather than patients' own understandings of safety.

Objective
To explore patients' understandings of safety in primary care.

Methods
Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients recruited from general practices in northwest England. Participants were asked basic socio-demographic information; thereafter, topics were largely introduced by interviewees themselves. Transcripts were coded and analysed using NVivo10 (qualitative data software), following a process of constant comparison.

Results
Thirty-eight people (14 men, 24 women) from 19 general practices in rural, small town and city locations were interviewed. Many of their concerns (about access, length of consultation, relationship continuity) have been discussed in terms of quality, but, in the interviews, were raised as matters of safety. Three broad themes were identified: (i) trust and psycho-social aspects of professional–patient relationships; (ii) choice, continuity, access, and the temporal underpinnings of safety; and (iii) organizational and systems-level tensions constraining safety.

Discussion
Conceptualizations of safety included common reliance on a bureaucratic framework of accreditation, accountability, procedural rules and regulation, but were also individual and context-dependent. For patients, safety is not just a property of systems, but personal and contingent and is realized in the interaction between doctor and patient. However, it is the systems approach that has dominated safety thinking, and patients' individualistic and relational conceptualizations are poorly accommodated within current service organization
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)253-263
Number of pages11
JournalHealth Expectations
Volume19
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Patient Safety
Primary Health Care
Safety
General Practice
Interviews
Accreditation
Social Responsibility
Systems Analysis
England
Referral and Consultation
Software
Demography
Organizations
Research

Cite this

Rhodes, Penny ; Campbell, Stephen ; Sanders, Caroline. / Trust, temporality and systems: How do patients understand patient safety in primary care? A qualitative study. In: Health Expectations. 2016 ; Vol. 19, No. 2. pp. 253-263.
@article{4d604e9922be4d39a00c2f8a01ebf6d5,
title = "Trust, temporality and systems: How do patients understand patient safety in primary care? A qualitative study",
abstract = "IntroductionPatient safety research has tended to focus on hospital settings, although most clinical encounters occur in primary care, and to emphasize practitioner errors, rather than patients' own understandings of safety.ObjectiveTo explore patients' understandings of safety in primary care.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted with patients recruited from general practices in northwest England. Participants were asked basic socio-demographic information; thereafter, topics were largely introduced by interviewees themselves. Transcripts were coded and analysed using NVivo10 (qualitative data software), following a process of constant comparison.ResultsThirty-eight people (14 men, 24 women) from 19 general practices in rural, small town and city locations were interviewed. Many of their concerns (about access, length of consultation, relationship continuity) have been discussed in terms of quality, but, in the interviews, were raised as matters of safety. Three broad themes were identified: (i) trust and psycho-social aspects of professional–patient relationships; (ii) choice, continuity, access, and the temporal underpinnings of safety; and (iii) organizational and systems-level tensions constraining safety.DiscussionConceptualizations of safety included common reliance on a bureaucratic framework of accreditation, accountability, procedural rules and regulation, but were also individual and context-dependent. For patients, safety is not just a property of systems, but personal and contingent and is realized in the interaction between doctor and patient. However, it is the systems approach that has dominated safety thinking, and patients' individualistic and relational conceptualizations are poorly accommodated within current service organization",
author = "Penny Rhodes and Stephen Campbell and Caroline Sanders",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1111/hex.12342",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "253--263",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

Trust, temporality and systems: How do patients understand patient safety in primary care? A qualitative study. / Rhodes, Penny; Campbell, Stephen; Sanders, Caroline.

In: Health Expectations, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2016, p. 253-263.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trust, temporality and systems: How do patients understand patient safety in primary care? A qualitative study

AU - Rhodes, Penny

AU - Campbell, Stephen

AU - Sanders, Caroline

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - IntroductionPatient safety research has tended to focus on hospital settings, although most clinical encounters occur in primary care, and to emphasize practitioner errors, rather than patients' own understandings of safety.ObjectiveTo explore patients' understandings of safety in primary care.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted with patients recruited from general practices in northwest England. Participants were asked basic socio-demographic information; thereafter, topics were largely introduced by interviewees themselves. Transcripts were coded and analysed using NVivo10 (qualitative data software), following a process of constant comparison.ResultsThirty-eight people (14 men, 24 women) from 19 general practices in rural, small town and city locations were interviewed. Many of their concerns (about access, length of consultation, relationship continuity) have been discussed in terms of quality, but, in the interviews, were raised as matters of safety. Three broad themes were identified: (i) trust and psycho-social aspects of professional–patient relationships; (ii) choice, continuity, access, and the temporal underpinnings of safety; and (iii) organizational and systems-level tensions constraining safety.DiscussionConceptualizations of safety included common reliance on a bureaucratic framework of accreditation, accountability, procedural rules and regulation, but were also individual and context-dependent. For patients, safety is not just a property of systems, but personal and contingent and is realized in the interaction between doctor and patient. However, it is the systems approach that has dominated safety thinking, and patients' individualistic and relational conceptualizations are poorly accommodated within current service organization

AB - IntroductionPatient safety research has tended to focus on hospital settings, although most clinical encounters occur in primary care, and to emphasize practitioner errors, rather than patients' own understandings of safety.ObjectiveTo explore patients' understandings of safety in primary care.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted with patients recruited from general practices in northwest England. Participants were asked basic socio-demographic information; thereafter, topics were largely introduced by interviewees themselves. Transcripts were coded and analysed using NVivo10 (qualitative data software), following a process of constant comparison.ResultsThirty-eight people (14 men, 24 women) from 19 general practices in rural, small town and city locations were interviewed. Many of their concerns (about access, length of consultation, relationship continuity) have been discussed in terms of quality, but, in the interviews, were raised as matters of safety. Three broad themes were identified: (i) trust and psycho-social aspects of professional–patient relationships; (ii) choice, continuity, access, and the temporal underpinnings of safety; and (iii) organizational and systems-level tensions constraining safety.DiscussionConceptualizations of safety included common reliance on a bureaucratic framework of accreditation, accountability, procedural rules and regulation, but were also individual and context-dependent. For patients, safety is not just a property of systems, but personal and contingent and is realized in the interaction between doctor and patient. However, it is the systems approach that has dominated safety thinking, and patients' individualistic and relational conceptualizations are poorly accommodated within current service organization

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12342

DO - 10.1111/hex.12342

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 253

EP - 263

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 2

ER -