The Impact of a Patient Participating in Evaluating Patient Safety by Using the Patient Measure of Safety in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is an essential element for delivering quality of healthcare. Many studies focus on measuring patient safety from the healthcare provider’s perspective to improve patient safety in healthcare facilities. However, patient participation may reduce medical errors and improve patient safety by providing information regarding the safety of their care. This study aimed to evaluate patient safety from the inpatients’ perspective and the extent of the influence of the sociodemographic factors on their assessment. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at hospitals in different Saudi Arabian regions with 1569 inpatient adults 18 years of older who voluntarily completed an online questionnaire using the Patient Measure of Safety tool (Arabic translated). Two questions were added to assess patient feedback about the overall perception of safety and witnessing patient safety events. COVID-19 patients and those with a mental disorder or incapable of providing informed consent were excluded. RESULT: The total number of participants was 1569 inpatients from 17 hospitals. Sixty-one percent of the participants were female, and 41.62% were from the 18- to 35-year age group. Less than half (38.69%) of patients stayed at the hospital between 3 and 5 days. Percentages of positive responses were more than 90% observed in dignity and respect, communication and teamworking, and organization and care planning domains. Percentages of negative responses were more than 20% found in organization and care planning, access to resources, and ward type and layout domains. Among the respondents, 57.3% (n = 899) rated the safety of their wards as excellent as opposed to 2.9% (n = 46) who rated it as poor. Approximately 5% (n = 79) have noticed 1 event, and 2.3% (n = 36) have noticed 2 or 3 events. Unemployed participants had a significantly lower rate of positive responses in domains of communication, access to resources, and ward type. In contrast, the no-schooling group had a significantly greater rate of negative responses in care planning and ward-type domains. CONCLUSIONS: The patient plays a key role in enhancing the quality of care and has the potential to detect adverse events. The study highlighted the need to focus on better communication processes for patients with low education levels to enhance their engagement in their care. Further steps should be taken to understand the extent of the patient’s involvement in the improvement that could be tackled from feedback on the safety of care.