title: Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine whether hospitals with a good organisation of care (such as improved nurse staffing and work environments) can affect patient care and nurse workforce stability in European countries.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross sectional surveys of patients and nurses.
  
  
  METHODS
  Nurses were surveyed in general acute care hospitals (488 in 12 European countries; 617 in the United States); patients were surveyed in 210 European hospitals and 430 US hospitals.
  
  
  METHODS
  33 659 nurses and 11 318 patients in Europe; 27 509 nurses and more than 120 000 patients in the US.
  
  
  METHODS
  Nurse outcomes (hospital staffing, work environments, burnout, dissatisfaction, intention to leave job in the next year, patient safety, quality of care), patient outcomes (satisfaction overall and with nursing care, willingness to recommend hospitals).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The percentage of nurses reporting poor or fair quality of patient care varied substantially by country (from 11% (Ireland) to 47% (Greece)), as did rates for nurses who gave their hospital a poor or failing safety grade (4% (Switzerland) to 18% (Poland)). We found high rates of nurse burnout (10% (Netherlands) to 78% (Greece)), job dissatisfaction (11% (Netherlands) to 56% (Greece)), and intention to leave (14% (US) to 49% (Finland, Greece)). Patients' high ratings of their hospitals also varied considerably (35% (Spain) to 61% (Finland, Ireland)), as did rates of patients willing to recommend their hospital (53% (Greece) to 78% (Switzerland)). Improved work environments and reduced ratios of patients to nurses were associated with increased care quality and patient satisfaction. In European hospitals, after adjusting for hospital and nurse characteristics, nurses with better work environments were half as likely to report poor or fair care quality (adjusted odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.61) and give their hospitals poor or failing grades on patient safety (0.50, 0.44 to 0.56). Each additional patient per nurse increased the odds of nurses reporting poor or fair quality care (1.11, 1.07 to 1.15) and poor or failing safety grades (1.10, 1.05 to 1.16). Patients in hospitals with better work environments were more likely to rate their hospital highly (1.16, 1.03 to 1.32) and recommend their hospitals (1.20, 1.05 to 1.37), whereas those with higher ratios of patients to nurses were less likely to rate them highly (0.94, 0.91 to 0.97) or recommend them (0.95, 0.91 to 0.98). Results were similar in the US. Nurses and patients agreed on which hospitals provided good care and could be recommended.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Deficits in hospital care quality were common in all countries. Improvement of hospital work environments might be a relatively low cost strategy to improve safety and quality in hospital care and to increase patient satisfaction.
authors.affiliation: Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. laiken@nursing.upenn.edu
authors.forename: Linda H
authors.initials: LH
authors.lastname: Aiken
authors.forename: Walter
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Sermeus
authors.forename: Koen
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Van den Heede
authors.forename: Douglas M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Sloane
authors.forename: Reinhard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Busse
authors.forename: Martin
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: McKee
authors.forename: Luk
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Bruyneel
authors.forename: Anne Marie
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Rafferty
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Griffiths
authors.forename: Maria Teresa
authors.initials: MT
authors.lastname: Moreno-Casbas
authors.forename: Carol
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Tishelman
authors.forename: Anne
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Scott
authors.forename: Tomasz
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Brzostek
authors.forename: Juha
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Kinnunen
authors.forename: Rene
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Schwendimann
authors.forename: Maud
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Heinen
authors.forename: Dimitris
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Zikos
authors.forename: Ingeborg Strømseng
authors.initials: IS
authors.lastname: Sjetne
authors.forename: Herbert L
authors.initials: HL
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Ann
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kutney-Lee
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002055:Burnout, Professional / Q000453:epidemiology; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005060:Europe / Q000453:epidemiology; D005260:Female; D019538:Health Care Surveys; D006761:Hospitals / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007588:Job Satisfaction; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009741:Nursing Staff, Hospital / Q000706:statistics & numerical data* / Q000600:supply & distribution; D061214:Patient Safety; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010361:Patients / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D010561:Personnel Staffing and Scheduling; D011787:Quality of Health Care / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014481:United States / Q000453:epidemiology; D017132:Workplace / Q000592:standards