An Analysis of Aptness and Comfort in Healthcare Units and Patient Safety in the Scope of Occupational Health and Safety

  • Teresa LajinhaEmail author
  • Miguel Tato DiogoEmail author
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 277)


Through data collected from the Portuguese National System of Health Quality Assessment (SINAS) for the dimensions Patient Safety and Aptness and Comfort in Healthcare Units a comparison was established between quality evaluation issues in Portuguese healthcare units and how these issues could affect healthcare workers’ health and safety, at the same time is presented a methodology that enables to rank healthcare units for the dimension Patient Safety. The methodology proposed shows that, globally, the units need to improve their marks in that dimension. The main adverse events responsible for poor outcomes regarding Patient Safety are also presented. The work done points out a misty relation between the two quality dimensions assessed, showing the need of clearing some aspects related with the evaluation of the dimension Aptness and Comfort in Healthcare Units, though it was found that the most critical events related with healthcare workers’ health and safety issues are linked with surgical processes.


Healthcare units Health and safety Quality 


  1. 1.
    Brasaite, I., Kaunonen, M., Martinkenas, A., Suominen, T.: Health care professionals’ attitudes regarding patient safety: cross-sectional survey. BMC Research Notes, pp. 9–177 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lundstrom, T., Pugliese, G., Bartley, J., Cox, J., Guither, C.: Organizational and environmental factors that affect worker health and safety and patient outcomes. Am. J. Infect. Control 30, 93–106 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laschinger, H.K.S., Leiter, M.P.: The impact of nursing work environments on patient safety outcomes: the mediating role of burnout/engagement. J. Nurs. Adm. 36(5), 259–267 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Joint Commission: Improving Patient and Worker Safety: Opportunities for Synergy, Collaboration and Innovation. Oakbrook Terrace, IL. Retrieved from (2012)
  5. 5.
    Nieva, V.F., Sorra, J.: Safety culture assessment: a tool for improving patient safety in healthcare organizations. Qual. Saf. Health Care 12(Suppl II), ii17–ii23 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carayon, P., Schoofs Hundt, A., Karsh, B.T., Gurses, A.P., Alvarado, C.J., Smith, M., Brennan, P.F.: Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model. Qual. Saf. Health Care 15(Suppl I), i50–i58 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Entidade Reguladora da Saúde Homepage. Last accessed 23 Aug 2019
  8. 8.
    Serviço Nacional de Saúde. Sistema Nacional de Avaliação em Saúde Homepage. Last accessed 20 Sep 2019
  9. 9.
    Spiliotis, J., Tsiveriotis, K., Datsis, A.D., Vaxevanidou, A., Zacharis, G., Giafis, K., Kekelos, S., Rogdakis, A.: Wound dehiscence: is still a problem in the 21st century: a retrospective study. World J. Emerg. Surg. 4(12), 1–5 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Death Rate in Low-Mortality Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs). Technical Specifications. Patient Safety Indicators #2 (PSI #2). AHRQ Quality Indicators, Version 4.5. Retrieved from (2013)
  11. 11.
    Administração Central do Sistema de Saúde. CIDES. Grupos de Diagnósticos Homogéneos. Retrieved from (2011)
  12. 12.
    Inweregbu, K., Dave, J., Pittard, A.: Nosocomial infections. Continuing Educ. Anaesth. Crit. Care Pain 5(1), 14–17 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CERENA – Centro de Recursos Naturais e Ambiente (Pólo-FEUP)Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Universidade Fernando PessoaPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations