Skip to main content

Table 3 Safety survey responses in relation to the journey stage of the transition

From: Implementing a survey for patients to provide safety experience feedback following a care transition: a feasibility study

Journey

Safety rating

Differences in Characteristics

 

N (% of all 366 respondents)

Safe (%)

Neutral (%)

Unsafe (%)

Transport typea

Ageb

Genderb

Communication

231 (63.1)

213 (92.2)

14 (6.1)

4 (1.7)

p < 0.001

Safe

Ambulance, 93.3%

Private car, 91.0%

Patient transport, 85.7%

p = 0.121

p = 0.876

Responsiveness

230 (62.8)

207 (90.0)

20 (8.7)

3 (1.3)

p < 0.001

Safe

Ambulance, 90.8%

Private car, 83.3%

Patient transport, 66.7%

p = 0.911

p = 0.463

Delays

226 (61.7)

Cycle 1: 151 (73.5)

Cycle 2: 34 (45.3)

Cycle 1: 29 (19.2)

Cycle 2: 23 (30.7)

Cycle 1: 11 (7.3)

Cycle 2: 18 (24.0)

p < 0.001

Safec

Ambulance, 71.4%

Private car, 67.2%

Patient transport, 58.3%

p = 0.460

p = 0.038 (male more likely to report safe)

Falls

230 (62.8)

194 (84.3)

29 (12.6)

7 (3.0)

p = 0.009

Safe

Ambulance, 90.8%

Private car, 83.3%

Patient transport, 66.7%

p = 0.420

p = 0.501

Medication

226 (61.7)

197 (87.2)

23 (10.2)

6 (2.7)

p = 0.001

Safe

Ambulance, 87.7%

Private car, 87.2%

Patient transport, 91.7%

p = 0.194

p = 0.444

Hygiene

232 (63.4)

211 (90.9)

18 (7.8)

3 (1.3)

p < 0.001

Safe

Ambulance, 91.7%

Private car, 92.4%

Patient transport, 81.8%

p = 0.536

p = 0.703

  1. a Kruskal-Wallis test comparing the three categories with > 10 responses: ambulance, private car, patient transport
  2. b Spearman’s rho correlation
  3. c Cycles 1 and 2 combined