Cargando…

Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand

INTRODUCTION: Safe hospitals are crucial in the management of major incidents and disasters. A hospital self-assessment tool was developed for Thailand to identify gaps and shortcomings in hospital preparedness. However, this tool lacks the ability to determine the level of preparedness and cannot b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit, Khorram-Manesh, Amir
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8409765/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483691
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S313311
_version_ 1783747048241102848
author Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit
Khorram-Manesh, Amir
author_facet Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit
Khorram-Manesh, Amir
author_sort Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Safe hospitals are crucial in the management of major incidents and disasters. A hospital self-assessment tool was developed for Thailand to identify gaps and shortcomings in hospital preparedness. However, this tool lacks the ability to determine the level of preparedness and cannot be used to standardize hospital readiness and enable continuous quality control. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test a developed scoring hospital assessment tool to evaluate the level of hospital preparedness and enable quality control and compare the results of various hospitals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using the nominal group technique, three experts evaluated all sections of the previously developed hospital self-assessment tool and recognized that each element could be answered by one of the three options: Yes, Not Known, and No. A pilot study was conducted in 11 hospitals to evaluate the feasibility of the tool. The number of Yes responses was divided by the total number of elements to represent the level of hospital preparedness and reported as either low (0‒59), average (60‒79), or good (80‒100). The results identified areas for improvement. RESULTS: Eleven out of 13 hospitals (85% response rate) in two provinces were enrolled in the study. The results showed various levels of preparedness in all the investigated hospitals. Two hospitals had low preparedness and needed great improvements. The remaining nine hospitals in the two provinces had average preparedness levels and needed improvements. One of the nine hospitals had a score very close to achieving good preparedness. No significant parameters were associated with the preparedness level. CONCLUSION: The developed scoring assessment tool for hospital safety demonstrated high utilization feasibility and indicated preparedness levels. The scoring tool also provided assessment levels that could enable continuous quality evaluation and improvements.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8409765
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84097652021-09-02 Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit Khorram-Manesh, Amir Risk Manag Healthc Policy Original Research INTRODUCTION: Safe hospitals are crucial in the management of major incidents and disasters. A hospital self-assessment tool was developed for Thailand to identify gaps and shortcomings in hospital preparedness. However, this tool lacks the ability to determine the level of preparedness and cannot be used to standardize hospital readiness and enable continuous quality control. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test a developed scoring hospital assessment tool to evaluate the level of hospital preparedness and enable quality control and compare the results of various hospitals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using the nominal group technique, three experts evaluated all sections of the previously developed hospital self-assessment tool and recognized that each element could be answered by one of the three options: Yes, Not Known, and No. A pilot study was conducted in 11 hospitals to evaluate the feasibility of the tool. The number of Yes responses was divided by the total number of elements to represent the level of hospital preparedness and reported as either low (0‒59), average (60‒79), or good (80‒100). The results identified areas for improvement. RESULTS: Eleven out of 13 hospitals (85% response rate) in two provinces were enrolled in the study. The results showed various levels of preparedness in all the investigated hospitals. Two hospitals had low preparedness and needed great improvements. The remaining nine hospitals in the two provinces had average preparedness levels and needed improvements. One of the nine hospitals had a score very close to achieving good preparedness. No significant parameters were associated with the preparedness level. CONCLUSION: The developed scoring assessment tool for hospital safety demonstrated high utilization feasibility and indicated preparedness levels. The scoring tool also provided assessment levels that could enable continuous quality evaluation and improvements. Dove 2021-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8409765/ /pubmed/34483691 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S313311 Text en © 2021 Wuthisuthimethawee and Khorram-Manesh. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Wuthisuthimethawee, Prasit
Khorram-Manesh, Amir
Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title_full Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title_fullStr Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title_full_unstemmed Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title_short Development and Validation of a Scoring Assessment Tool for Hospital Safety: A Pilot Study Comparing Hospital Preparedness in Thailand
title_sort development and validation of a scoring assessment tool for hospital safety: a pilot study comparing hospital preparedness in thailand
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8409765/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483691
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S313311
work_keys_str_mv AT wuthisuthimethaweeprasit developmentandvalidationofascoringassessmenttoolforhospitalsafetyapilotstudycomparinghospitalpreparednessinthailand
AT khorrammaneshamir developmentandvalidationofascoringassessmenttoolforhospitalsafetyapilotstudycomparinghospitalpreparednessinthailand