Amalia Cochran1, William B Elder2. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, SOM 3B312, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. Electronic address: amalia.cochran@hsc.utah.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, SOM 3B312, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgeons are the physician group most commonly identified as "disruptive physicians." The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of the results of disruptive surgeon behavior and to identify the coping strategies used by perioperative staff. METHODS: Perspectives of 19 individuals of diverse occupations in the perioperative setting were drawn together using a grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Effects of disruptive behavior described by participants included shift in attention from the patient to the surgeon, increased mistakes during procedures, deterrence from careers in surgery, and diminished respect for surgeons. Individual coping strategies employed in the face of intimidation include talking to colleagues, externalizing the behavior, avoidance of perpetrators, and warning others. CONCLUSIONS: Using grounded theory analysis, we were able to elucidate the impact of disruptive surgeon behavior in the perioperative environment. This conceptual model may be used to understand and counter the negative effects of manipulation and intimidation of hospital staff and trainees and to build on current programmatic strengths to improve surgical environments and training.
BACKGROUND: Surgeons are the physician group most commonly identified as "disruptive physicians." The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of the results of disruptive surgeon behavior and to identify the coping strategies used by perioperative staff. METHODS: Perspectives of 19 individuals of diverse occupations in the perioperative setting were drawn together using a grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Effects of disruptive behavior described by participants included shift in attention from the patient to the surgeon, increased mistakes during procedures, deterrence from careers in surgery, and diminished respect for surgeons. Individual coping strategies employed in the face of intimidation include talking to colleagues, externalizing the behavior, avoidance of perpetrators, and warning others. CONCLUSIONS: Using grounded theory analysis, we were able to elucidate the impact of disruptive surgeon behavior in the perioperative environment. This conceptual model may be used to understand and counter the negative effects of manipulation and intimidation of hospital staff and trainees and to build on current programmatic strengths to improve surgical environments and training.
Authors: William O Cooper; Oscar Guillamondegui; O Joe Hines; C Scott Hultman; Rachel R Kelz; Perry Shen; David A Spain; John F Sweeney; Ilene N Moore; Joseph Hopkins; Ira R Horowitz; Russell M Howerton; J Wayne Meredith; Nathan O Spell; Patricia Sullivan; Henry J Domenico; James W Pichert; Thomas F Catron; Lynn E Webb; Roger R Dmochowski; Jan Karrass; Gerald B Hickson Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Sofia Erestam; David Bock; Annette Erichsen Andersson; Anders Bjartell; Stefan Carlsson; Karin Stinesen Kollberg; Daniel Sjoberg; Gunnar Steineck; Johan Stranne; Thordis Thorsteinsdottir; Stavros Tyritzis; Anna Wallerstedt Lantz; Peter Wiklund; Eva Angenete; Eva Haglind Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 4.584