Sampling:

Qualitative researchers tend to select a non-probability procedure in their sampling strategy (Neuman, 2007). This kind of sampling is very helpful if the researcher is looking for information from targets subjects. There are four types of non-probability sampling: Firstly accidental sampling, secondly, Quota sampling, thirdly Purposive sampling and fourthly Snowball sampling (Bowling, 2002). Phase 2 used purposive sampling which is considered as a type of non-probability sampling in which the selection of the participants

111

to be involved in the study sample based on a specific purpose rather than randomly (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003).

Therefore, the justification for choosing this type of sampling was because the researcher had prior knowledge and information about the participants from the study first phase. Also, this type of sampling helps the researcher to get insights into the issues related to patient safety which was obtained from the findings of the first phase and they needed to be explained in more detail (Alston& Bowles, 2003).

Therefore, the sample involved health care workers who had participated in the first research phase and who held different perceptions of patient safety. Participants with the same experience were chosen so that the researcher could acquire a deep understanding of the research problem. As the participants came from a variety of professional backgrounds, and had different characteristics they were purposively selected. Different healthcare workers were chosen, such as doctors, nurses, pharmacists, technicians and managers, based in three different geographical locations.

Therefore, purposive sampling was undertaken, based on professional group, geographical location and the responses given in the study phase one (survey) to gain a sample of health care workers including nurses, doctors, technicians, pharmacists and managers who took part in the survey that formed the first study. This helped to ensure that the study sample had appropriate representation of each group of health care workers based on the skill mix and who had valuable knowledge to contribute to the study (Bowling, 2002).

The sample involved 2 participants from each of the 5 health care workers groups, whose overall perceptions of patient safety culture were either negative or positive; from each of

112

the three hospitals. A recruitment matrix was produced and used as a means of selecting participants who fulfil the inclusion criteria. An example matrix is shown in table (4.6) the selection of a sample of health care workers with either negative or positive perception toward Patient Safety practice in the three.

Table 2.4 sample selection of health care workers based on their perception toward patient safety Total Managers Pharmacists Technicians Nurses Doctors

Heath care workers

10 + _ + _ + _ + _ + _ Hospital A 10 + _ + _ + _ + _ + _ Hospital B 10 + _ + _ + _ + _ + _ Hospital C 30 6 6 6 6 6

Total of the sample

4.7.4 Data collection methods:

During the second phase of the study, the interview was used as the data collection technique, since it is considered to be one of the most powerful methods for qualitative research (Punch, 2005). There was greater confidence that such close communication with the participants during semi-structured interviews would yield benefits for the study, rather merely than using a survey (Creswell & Clark, 2007). The interview has been defined by Hussey & Hussey (1997) as a data collection method where participants are questioned to discover what they think, feel or do. The interview can be classified into three sorts: structured; unstructured; and semi-structured interviews (Alston & Bowles, 2003; Denscombe, 2007). Interviews that are standardized or structured are like questionnaires

113

that have been administered by a researcher with a predetermined list of questions for the participants (Sekaran, 2003).

This would not be ideal for the study because such an approach would have been similar to the survey data method which had less interaction with participants would only be suitable for broad, open-ended question. On the other hand, an unstructured interview is one that has no predetermined questions and is more informal, open and flexible and which lets the researcher explore an area of interest more deeply (Oppenheim, 2001). The disadvantage of this approach is that participants can move into territory that is of no relevance to the research questions. Neither, structured nor unstructured interviews, then, would have been suitable for the study as clarification was needed of certain issues that had been highlighted in Phase 1.

The semi-structured interview was the type used within the second phase for the gathering of more data from the various groups of healthcare workers. This was so that a deeper insight could be gained about the perceptions of the selected participants which contains the discussion about patient safety culture. Such semi-structured, non-standardised interviews are often used for qualitative research, so that an understanding can be gained of the perceptions of participants and the attachment that they may have towards certain events, phenomena or meanings (Berg, 2007). Semi-structured interview can cover an overall subject and ensure that interests are explored and certain issues, general themes and specific questions are pursued (Lee, 1999).

Any ambiguities, processes, complexities and contradictions that may be discovered along the way can be accommodated within a semi-structured. This type of interview can be expensive and time consuming (Bryan, 2012) however, within the second phase of this study, the number of participants was reasonably small and there were sufficient time and

114

resources. This interview type was chosen as the study did not involve the testing of a specific hypothesis, though enabled the answering of the question ‘why?’ in relation to the poor perception of patient safety practices in Libyan hospitals (David & Sutton, 2004; Saunders et al., 2009).