Aim The Green Cross method was developed to support healthcare staff in daily patient safety work. The aim of this study was to describe users’ experiences of the method when working with patient safety and their views on the core elements. Background Patient safety systems need to be user‐friendly to facilitate learning from adverse events. The Green Cross method is described as a simple visual method to recognise risks and preventable adverse events (PAEs) in real time. There are no previous studies describing users’ experiences of the Green Cross method. Design A qualitative descriptive design. Methods 32 healthcare workers and managers from different specialties in a Swedish hospital were interviewed, from May–September 2018 about their experiences of the Green Cross method; either individually or as part of a group. The interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. The study follows the COREQ guidelines for qualitative data. Results Participants associated the Green Cross method with patient safety, but no core elements of the method were identified. Instead, the opportunity to be engaged in patient safety work in a systematic way was underlined by all study participants. Highlighted key areas were the simplicity and the systematic framework of the method along with a need of distinct leadership. The daily meetings promoted trust and dialogue and developed the patient safety mindset. Daily meetings, together with the visualisation of the cross, were emphasised as important by users who otherwise had limited knowledge of the entire method. Conclusion This study offers valuable information that can help deepen the understanding of how the method specifically supports patient safety work. Relevance to clinical practice Healthcare workers are expected to report patient safety issues. This study presents user‐friendly aspects of the method as well as limitations, relevant for present and future users.

Background Children with long-term illnesses frequently experience symptoms that could negatively affect their daily lives. These symptoms are often underreported in health care. Despite a large number of mobile health (mHealth) tools, few are based on a theoretical framework or supported by scientific knowledge. Incorporating universal design when developing a product can promote accessibility and facilitate person-centered communication. Objective The aim of this study is to identify the symptom-reporting needs of children with cancer and congenital heart defects that could be satisfied by using a mobile app. Another aim is to evaluate how the child might interact with the app by considering universal design principles and to identify parents’ views and health care professionals’ expectations and requirements for an mHealth tool. Methods User-centered design is an iterative process that focuses on an understanding of the users. The adapted user-centered design process includes 2 phases with 4 stages. Phase 1 involved interviews with 7 children with long-term illnesses, 8 parents, and 19 health care professionals to determine their needs and wishes for support; a workshop with 19 researchers to deepen our understanding of the needs; and a workshop with developers to establish a preliminary tool to further investigate needs and behaviors. Phase 2 involved interviews with 10 children with long-term illnesses, 9 parents, and 21 health care professionals to evaluate the mock-up (prototype) of the mHealth tool. Data were synthesized using the interpretive description technique. Results A total of 4 aspects of needs emerged from the synthesis of the data, as follows: different perspectives on provided and perceived support; the need for an easy-to-use, non–clinic-based tool to self-report symptoms and to facilitate communication; the need for safety by being in control and reaching the child’s voice; and a way of mapping the illness journey to facilitate recall and improve diagnostics. The children with long-term illnesses expressed a need to not only communicate about pain but also communicate about anxiety, fatigue, fear, and nausea. Conclusions The findings of this study indicated that the PicPecc (Pictorial Support in Person-Centered Care for Children) app is a potential solution for providing communicative support to children with long-term illnesses dealing with multiple symptoms and conditions. The interview data also highlighted symptoms that are at risk of being overlooked if they are not included in the mobile app. Further studies are needed to include usability testing and evaluation in hospitals and home care settings.

Objectives: The Green Cross (GC) method is a visual method for health service staff to recognize risks and preventable adverse events (PAEs) on a daily basis. The aim was to compare patient safety culture and the number of reported PAEs in units using the GC method with units that do not.Methods: This study has a retrospective cross-sectional design in the setting of psychiatric and somatic care departments in a Swedish hospital. In total, 1476 staff members from 62 different units participate in the study.Results: Units who had implemented the GC method scored higher than non-GC units in overall quality. The dimensions Feedback and communication about error, Nonpunitive response to errors, Organizational learningcontinuous improvement, Handoffs and transitions between units and shifts, and Teamwork within units scored significantly higher in GC units. More risks were reported in the incident reporting system in GC units than in non-GC units, but the number of PAEs was similar. Units with nursing staff who used the GC method scored higher on patient safety culture than those who did not use the method. This difference was not seen in physician units. Conclusions:The implementation of the GC method has a positive impact on patient safety culture and PAE reporting. However, the method does not seem to have the same impact in physician units as in units with nursing staff, which calls for further investigation.

Communication partner training can be effective in improving communication in aphasia. However, further research is needed on how to measure the outcome of such interventions. In this paper we discuss the phenomenon of reliability in assessments in relation to the results of analyses using a rating scale designed to measure the ability to support a person with aphasia in natural conversational interaction. The scale was used by four assessors to rate 45 video recordings. Calculations of reliability and agreement produced varying results but were mostly satisfactory. However, the results highlight how interaction between factors such as complexity of assessments; design of the rating scale; factors inherent in the individual assessor; and the statistical measures used to analyse the outcome may result in a conflict between aspects of validity and reliability. Interpretations of outcome obtained with rating scales thus need to be based on knowledge about factors influencing the results.