Maintaining the highest levels of patient safety is a priority of healthcare organisations. However, although considerable resources are invested in improving safety, patients still suffer avoidable harm. The aims of this study are: (1) to examine the extent, range, and nature of patient safety research activities carried out in the Republic of Ireland (RoI); (2) make recommendations for future research; and (3) consider how these recommendations align with the Health Service Executive’s (HSE) patient safety strategy. A five-stage scoping review methodology was used to synthesise the published research literature on patient safety carried out in the RoI: (1) identify the research question; (2) identify relevant studies; (3) study selection; (4) chart the data; and (5) collate, summarise, and report the results. Electronic searches were conducted across five electronic databases. A total of 31 papers met the inclusion criteria. Of the 24 papers concerned with measuring and monitoring safety, 12 (50%) assessed past harm, 4 (16.7%) the reliability of safety systems, 4 (16.7%) sensitivity to operations, 9 (37.5%) anticipation and preparedness, and 2 (8.3%) integration and learning. Of the six intervention papers, three (50%) were concerned with education and training, two (33.3%) with simplification and standardisation, and one (16.7%) with checklists. One paper was concerned with identifying potential safety interventions. There is a modest, but growing, body of patient safety research conducted in the RoI. It is hoped that this review will provide direction to researchers, healthcare practitioners, and health service managers, in how to build upon existing research in order to improve patient safety.

Background In Saudi Arabia, there has been substantial investment in patient safety initiatives. Objectives The objectives of this scoping review were to map the quantity and nature of existing research on patient safety in Saudi Arabian hospitals and to identify gaps in the extant literature. Methods Electronic searches were completed using five databases. Peer reviewed studies written in English or Arabic that focused on patient safety in hospitals in Saudi Arabia were reviewed. Studies concerned with measuring and monitoring safety were categorised using the Measuring and Monitoring Safety Framework. The hierarchy of intervention effectiveness was used to categorise interventions studies. Results : A total of 2,489 studies were screened, with 67 meeting the inclusion criteria. In total, 61 (91%) of included studies were focused on the measurement or monitoring of safety. Six studies (9%) considered interventions to improve patient safety. Of these, 31.3% of the studies assessed past harm, 1.5% reliability of safety systems, 7.5% sensitivity to operations, 46.3% anticipation and preparedness, and 3% (2/67) integration and learning. Of the six intervention studies, one study reported enforcing functions interventions, one simplification and standardisation, two rules and policies, and two studies applied an education and training intervention. Conclusion As is the case internationally, there is a paucity of evidence on interventions to improve safety in Saudi Arabia. This review has identified areas of strength, redundancy, and gaps in patient safety research in the Kingdom. However, the findings also have implications for the MMS in other healthcare systems.

Background There is much variability in the measurement and monitoring of patient safety across healthcare organizations. With no recognized standardized approach, this study examines how the key components outlined in Vincent et al’s Measuring and Monitoring Safety (MMS) framework can be utilized to critically appraise a healthcare safety surveillance system. The aim of this study is to use the MMS framework to evaluate the Saudi Arabian healthcare safety surveillance system for hospital care. Methods This qualitative study consisted of two distinct phases. The first phase used document analysis to review national-level guidance relevant to measuring and monitoring safety in Saudi Arabia. The second phase consisted of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders between May and August 2020 via a video conference call and focused on exploring their knowledge of how patient safety is measured and monitored in hospitals. The MMS framework was used to support data analysis. Results Three documents were included for analysis and 21 semi-structured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders working in the Saudi Arabian healthcare system. A total of 39 unique methods of MMS were identified, with one method of MMS addressing two dimensions. Of these MMS methods: 10 (25 %) were concerned with past harm; 14 (35 %) were concerned with the reliability of safety critical processes, 3 (7.5 %) were concerned with sensitivity to operations, 2 (5 %) were concerned with anticipation and preparedness, and 11 (27.5 %) were concerned with integration and learning. Conclusions The document analysis and interviews show an extensive system of MMS is in place in Saudi Arabian hospitals. The assessment of MMS offers a useful framework to help healthcare organizations and researchers to think critically about MMS, and how the data from different methods of MMS can be integrated in individual countries or health systems.

Background Measuring and monitoring safety (MMS) is critical to the success of safety improvement efforts in healthcare. However, a major challenge to improving safety is the lack of high quality information to support performance evaluation. Aims The aim of this study was to use Vincent et al.’s MMS framework to evaluate the methods used to MMS in Irish hospitals and make recommendations for improvement. Methods The first phase of this qualitative study used document analysis to review national guidance on MMS in Ireland. The second phase consisted of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders on their understanding of MMS. The MMS framework was used to classify the methods identified. Results Six documents were included for analysis, and 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders working in the Irish healthcare system. A total of 162 methods of MMS were identified, with one method of MMS addressing two dimensions. Of these MMS methods, 30 (18.4%) were concerned with past harm, 40 (24.5%) were concerned with the reliability of safety critical processes, 16 (9.8%) were concerned with sensitivity to operations, 28 (17.2%) were concerned with anticipation and preparedness, and 49 (30%) were concerned with integration and learning. Conclusions There are a wide range of methods of MMS in Irish hospitals. It is suggested that there is a need to identify those methods of MMS that are particularly useful in reducing harm and supporting action and improvement and do not place a large burden on healthcare staff to either use or interpret.