Cited by 79Geriatric Care and Nursing HomesPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsHospital Admissions and Outcomes

Patient Safety Culture and the Association with Safe Resident Care in Nursing Homes

Thomas, K. S., Hyer, K., Castle, N. G., Branch, L. G., Andel, R., Weech-Maldonado, R.·2012·The Gerontologist

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Studies have shown that patient safety culture (PSC) is poorly developed in nursing homes (NHs), and, therefore, residents of NHs may be at risk of harm. Using Donabedian's Structure-Process-Outcome (SPO) model, we examined the relationships among top management's ratings of NH PSC, a process of care, and safety outcomes. DESIGN AND METHODS: Using top management's responses from a nationally representative sample of 3,557 NHs on the 2008 Nursing Home Survey on PSC, the Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting Database, and the Minimum Data Set, we examined the relationships among the three components of Donabedian's SPO model: structure (PSC), a process of care (physical restraints), and patient safety outcomes (residents who fell). RESULTS: Results from generalized estimating equations indicated that higher ratings of PSC were significantly related to lower prevalence of physical restraints (odds ratio [OR] = 0.997, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.995-0.999) and residents who fell (OR = 0.999, 95% CI = 0.998-0.999). Physical restraint use was related to falls after controlling for structural characteristics and PSC (OR = 1.698, 95% CI = 1.619-1.781). IMPLICATIONS: These findings can contribute to the development of PSC in NHs and promote improvements in health care that can be measured by process of care and resident outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/geront/gns007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thomas, K. S., Hyer, K., Castle, N. G., Branch, L. G., Andel, R., & Weech-Maldonado, R.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Thomas, K. S.
Venue
The Gerontologist
Published
2012-03-01
Volume
52
Issue
6
Pages
802-811
ISSN
  • 0016-9013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-5341
OpenAlex
W2149570274
Cited by
79
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4
FWCI
6.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Gerontologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R36HS19671-01, R36HS019671)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
patient safety culture, nursing homes, physical restraint, falls, resident safety, process of care, Donabedian structure-process-outcome model, long-term care quality
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Attitude of Health Personnel, Health Surveys, Homes for the Aged, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Nursing Homes, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Quality of Health Care, Restraint, Physical, United States, Organizational Culture, Confidence Intervals, Odds Ratio, Safety Management, Patient Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review