OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop and validate SafeHIT, an instrument to assess self-reported safe use of HIT among health care practitioners.
METHODS: Systematic literature review and a semistructured interview with 31 experts were adopted to generate SafeHIT instrument items. In total, 450 physicians from various departments at three Malaysian public hospitals participated in the questionnaire survey to validate SafeHIT. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were undertaken to explore the items that best represent a specific construct and to confirm the reliability and validity of the SafeHIT, respectively.
RESULTS: The final SafeHIT consisted of 14 constructs and 58 items in total. The result of the CFA confirmed that all constructs demonstrated adequate convergent and discriminant validity.
CONCLUSION: A reliable and valid theoretically underpinned measure of determinants of safe HIT use behavior has been developed. Understanding external factors that influence safe HIT use is useful for developing targeted interventions that favor the quality and safety of health care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Articles from Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed databases were collected following PRISMA guidelines. Key term searches included "video recording," "ethical issues," and "patients." Inclusion criteria encompassed video and audio recording interactions between healthcare providers and patients in any clinical setting, final publications, and the English language. Exclusions were imaging or photography recording and non-clinical settings. The qualitative synthesis involved iterative reading, thematic coding analysis in Excel, and specific analysis to address the research question.
RESULTS: Initial database search, identified 363 records. After screening, a total of 22 articles were included for analysis. Five themes were identified from the selected articles: i) privacy and confidentiality, ii) informed consent, iii) beneficence and non-maleficence, iv) integrity and professionalism and v) governance, policy and legal framework. Majority of the reviewed articles concentrate on backgrounds within the fields of psychiatry, neurology and surgical-based medical specialities. The identified themes have demonstrated consistency across the majority of the articles analysed. Among the most frequently discussed themes, it's evident that ethical concerns extend beyond just the patient's realm to encompass the responsibilities of the healthcare provider (HCP) as well. Both patients and HCPs have their respective rights and responsibilities in ensuring the ethical use of video recording in clinical settings.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this review has highlighted the multifaceted ethical challenges surrounding the integration of video recording in healthcare settings. While video recording offers benefits for patient care, education, and quality improvement, its adoption presents complexities. Ethical dilemmas concerning patient privacy, consent, and data management must be addressed alongside practical barriers like technological limitations and resource constraints. Collaboration among healthcare providers, policymakers, and stakeholders is crucial to navigating these challenges ethically. Future research should delve into patient perspectives, develop ethical guidelines, and assess the impact of video recording on patient outcomes. By understanding these implications, healthcare can effectively leverage video recording to improve patient care while maintaining ethical standards.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A systematic search was conducted on three databases: PubMed, Ovid Medline and Google Scholar to identify relevant peer-reviewed studies using the keywords "performance," "impact," "physician," "medical," "doctor," "leader," "healthcare institutions" and "hospital." Only quantitative studies that compared the performance of health-care institutions led by leaders with medical background versus non-medical background were included. Articles were screened and assessed for eligibility before the relevant data were extracted to summarize, appraise and make a narrative account of the findings.
FINDINGS: A total of eight studies were included, four were based in the USA, two in the UK and one from Germany and one from the Arab World. Half of the studies (n = 4) reported overall better health-care institutional performance in terms of hospital quality ranking such as clinical effectiveness and patient safety under leaders with medical background, whereas one study showed poorer performance. The remaining studies reported mixed results among the different performance indicators, especially financial performance.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: While medical background leaders may have an edge in clinical competence to manage health-care institutions, it will be beneficial to equip them with essential management skills to optimize leadership competence and enhance organizational performance.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The exclusive inclusion of quantitative empirical studies that compared health-care institutional performance medical and non-medical leaders provides a clearer link between the relationship between health-care institutional performance and the leaders' background.