Background: Psychological safety, a shared belief that interpersonal risk taking is safe, is an important determinant of incident reporting. However, how psychological safety affects near-miss reporting is unclear, as near misses contain contrasting cues that highlight both resilience ("we avoided failure") and vulnerability ("we nearly failed"). Near misses offer learning opportunities for addressing underlying causes of potential incidents, and it is crucial to understand what facilitates near-miss reporting.
Methods: A survey of radiation oncology department staff in an academic hospital assessed psychological safety and presented five scenarios with varying proximity to patient harm: "standard care" involving no harm, three near misses with varying proximity to harm ("could have happened," "fortuitous catch," "almost happened"), and one "hit" involving harm. Respondents evaluated each event as success or failure and reported willingness to report on a seven-point Likert scale. The analysis employed ordered logistic regression models.
Results: A total of 78 staff (61.4%) completed the survey. The odds of reporting "hit" (odds ratio [OR]: 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.23), "almost happened" (OR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.07-2.37), and "fortuitous catch" (OR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.10-2.33) improved with an increase in psychological safety. The relationship of psychological safety to reporting "standard care" and "could have happened" was not statistically significant. The odds of reporting were higher when a near miss was discerned as failure (vs. success).
Conclusion: Near misses are not processed and reported equally. The effect of psychological safety on reporting near misses becomes stronger with their increasing proximity to a negative outcome. Educating health care workers to properly identify near misses and fostering psychological safety may increase near-miss reporting and improve patient safety.
Copyright © 2020 The Joint Commission. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.