Alexander Villafranca1, Brett Hiebert2, Colin Hamlin3, Amy Young4, Divya Parveen1, Rakesh C Arora3, Michael Avidan5, Eric Jacobsohn6. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, AE215, Harry Medovy House - 671 William Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0Z2, Canada. 2. Cardiac Sciences Program, Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 3. Department of Surgery, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 4. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 5. Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. 6. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, AE215, Harry Medovy House - 671 William Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0Z2, Canada. EJacobsohn@exchange.hsc.mb.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Disruptive intraoperative behaviour ranges from incivility to abuse. This behaviour can have deleterious effects on clinicians, students, institutions, and patients. Previous investigations of this behaviour used underdeveloped tools or small sampling frames. We therefore examined the prevalence and predictors of perceived exposure to disruptive behaviour in a multinational sample of operating room clinicians. METHODS: A total of 134 perioperative associations in seven countries were asked to distribute a survey examining five types of exposure to disruptive behaviour: personal, directed toward patients, directed toward colleagues, directed toward others, or undirected. To compare the average amount of exposure with each type, we used a Friedman's test with select post hoc Wilcoxon tests. A negative binomial regression model identified socio-demographic predictors of personal exposure. RESULTS: Of the 134 organizations approached, 23 (17%) complied. The total response rate was estimated to be 7.6% (7465/101,624). Almost all (97.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 96.6 to 97.4) of the respondents reported exposure to disruptive behaviour in the past year, with the average respondent experiencing 61 incidents per year (95% CI, 57 to 65). Groups reporting higher personal exposure included clinicians who were young, inexperienced, female, non-heterosexual, working as nurses, or working in clinics with private funding (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Perceived exposure to disruptive behaviour was prevalent and frequent, with the most common behaviours involving speaking ill of clinicians and patients. These perceptions, whether accurate or not, can result in detrimental consequences. Greater efforts are required to eliminate disruptive intraoperative behaviour, with recognition that specific groups are more likely to report experiencing such behaviours.
PURPOSE: Disruptive intraoperative behaviour ranges from incivility to abuse. This behaviour can have deleterious effects on clinicians, students, institutions, and patients. Previous investigations of this behaviour used underdeveloped tools or small sampling frames. We therefore examined the prevalence and predictors of perceived exposure to disruptive behaviour in a multinational sample of operating room clinicians. METHODS: A total of 134 perioperative associations in seven countries were asked to distribute a survey examining five types of exposure to disruptive behaviour: personal, directed toward patients, directed toward colleagues, directed toward others, or undirected. To compare the average amount of exposure with each type, we used a Friedman's test with select post hoc Wilcoxon tests. A negative binomial regression model identified socio-demographic predictors of personal exposure. RESULTS: Of the 134 organizations approached, 23 (17%) complied. The total response rate was estimated to be 7.6% (7465/101,624). Almost all (97.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 96.6 to 97.4) of the respondents reported exposure to disruptive behaviour in the past year, with the average respondent experiencing 61 incidents per year (95% CI, 57 to 65). Groups reporting higher personal exposure included clinicians who were young, inexperienced, female, non-heterosexual, working as nurses, or working in clinics with private funding (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Perceived exposure to disruptive behaviour was prevalent and frequent, with the most common behaviours involving speaking ill of clinicians and patients. These perceptions, whether accurate or not, can result in detrimental consequences. Greater efforts are required to eliminate disruptive intraoperative behaviour, with recognition that specific groups are more likely to report experiencing such behaviours.
Authors: Glory E Mgboji; Fasika A Woreta; Michael J Fliotsos; Sidra Zafar; Joseph Ssekasanvu; Divya Srikumaran; Jiawei Zhao; Daniel L Buccino; Linda Regan Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2021-08-01
Authors: Pedro Moreno-Leal; César Leal-Costa; José Luis Díaz-Agea; Ismael Jiménez-Ruiz; Antonio Jesús Ramos-Morcillo; María Ruzafa-Martínez; Adriana Catarina De Souza Oliveira Journal: Healthcare (Basel) Date: 2021-12-23