Evaluation of a culture change program to reduce unprofessional behaviours by hospital co-workers in Australian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Unprofessional behaviours between healthcare workers are highly prevalent. Evaluations of large-scale culture change programs are rare resulting in limited evidence of intervention effectiveness. We conducted a multi-method evaluation of a professional accountability and culture change program "Ethos" implemented across eight Australian hospitals. The Ethos program incorporates training for staff in speaking-up; an online system for reporting co-worker behaviours; and a tiered accountability pathway, including peer-messengers who deliver feedback to staff for 'reflection' or 'recognition'. Here we report the final evaluation component which aimed to measure changes in the prevalence of unprofessional behaviours before and after Ethos. METHODS: A survey of staff (clinical and non-clinical) experiences of 26 unprofessional behaviours across five hospitals at baseline before (2018) and 2.5-3 years after (2021/2022) Ethos implementation. Five of the 26 behaviours were classified as 'extreme' (e.g., assault) and 21 as incivility/bullying (e.g., being spoken to rudely). Our analysis assessed changes in four dimensions: work-related bullying; person-related bullying; physical bullying and sexual harassment. Change in experience of incivility/bullying was compared using multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Change in extreme behaviours was assessed using multivariable binary logistic regression. All models were adjusted for respondent characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 3975 surveys were completed. Staff reporting frequent incivility/bullying significantly declined from 41.7% (n = 1064; 95% CI 39.7,43.9) at baseline to 35.5% (n = 505; 95% CI 32.8,38.3; χ2(1) = 14.3; P < 0.001) post-Ethos. The odds of experiencing incivility/bullying declined by 24% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.66,0.87; P < 0.001) and odds of experiencing extreme behaviours by 32% (aOR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54,0.85; P < 0.001) following Ethos. All four dimensions showed a reduction of 32-41% in prevalence post-Ethos. Non-clinical staff reported the greatest decrease in their experience of unprofessional behaviour (aOR 0.41; 95% CI 0.29, 0.61). Staff attitudes and reported skills to speak-up were significantly more positive at follow-up. Awareness of the program was high (82.1%; 95% CI 80.0, 84.0%); 33% of respondents had sent or received an Ethos message. CONCLUSION: The Ethos program was associated with significant reductions in the prevalence of reported unprofessional behaviours and improved capacity of hospital staff to speak-up. These results add to evidence that staff will actively engage with a system that supports informal feedback to co-workers about their behaviours and is facilitated by trained peer messengers.

Co-worker unprofessional behaviour and patient safety risks: an analysis of co-worker reports across eight Australian hospitals.

A key component of professional accountability programmes is online reporting tools that allow hospital staff to report co-worker unprofessional behaviour. Few studies have analysed data from these systems to further understand the nature or impact of unprofessional behaviour amongst staff. Ethos is a whole-of-hospital professional accountability programme that includes an online messaging system. Ethos has now been implemented across multiple Australian hospitals. This study examined reported unprofessional behaviour that staff indicated created a risk to patient safety. This study included 1310 Ethos submissions reporting co-worker unprofessional behaviour between 2017 and 2020 across eight Australian hospitals. Submissions that indicated the behaviour increased the risk to patient safety were identified. Descriptive summary statistics were presented for reporters and subjects of submissions about unprofessional behaviour. Logistic regression was applied to examine the association between each unprofessional behaviour (of the six most frequently reported in the Ethos submissions) and patient safety risk reported in the submissions. The descriptions in the reports were reviewed and the patient safety risks were coded using a framework aligned with the World Health Organization's International Classification for Patient Safety. Of 1310 submissions about unprofessional behaviour, 395 (30.2%) indicated that there was a risk to patient safety. Nurses made the highest number of submissions that included a patient safety risk [3.47 submissions per 100 nursing staff, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.09-3.9] compared to other professional groups. Medical professionals had the highest rate as subjects of submissions for unprofessional behaviour with a patient safety risk (5.19 submissions per 100 medical staff, 95% CI: 4.44-6.05). 'Opinions being ignored' (odds ratio: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.23-2.22; P < .001) and 'someone withholding information which affects work performance' were behaviours strongly associated with patient safety risk in the submissions (odds ratio: 2.50; 95% CI: 1.73-3.62; P < .001) compared to submissions without a patient safety risk. The two main types of risks to patient safety described were related to clinical process/procedure and clinical administration. Commonly reported events included staff not following policy or protocol; doctors refusing to review a patient; and interruptions and inadequate information during handover. Our findings indicate that unprofessional behaviour was associated with risks to patient safety. Co-worker reports about unprofessional behaviour have significant value as they can be used by organizations to better understand how unprofessional behaviour can disrupt work practices and lead to risks to patient safety.

Retrospective analysis of factors influencing the implementation of a program to address unprofessional behaviour and improve culture in Australian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Unprofessional behaviour among hospital staff is common. Such behaviour negatively impacts on staff wellbeing and patient outcomes. Professional accountability programs collect information about unprofessional staff behaviour from colleagues or patients, providing this as informal feedback to raise awareness, promote reflection, and change behaviour. Despite increased adoption, studies have not assessed the implementation of these programs utilising implementation theory. This study aims to (1) identify factors influencing the implementation of a whole-of-hospital professional accountability and culture change program, Ethos, implemented in eight hospitals within a large healthcare provider group, and (2) examine whether expert recommended implementation strategies were intuitively used during implementation, and the degree to which they were operationalised to address identified barriers. METHOD: Data relating to implementation of Ethos from organisational documents, interviews with senior and middle management, and surveys of hospital staff and peer messengers were obtained and coded in NVivo using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation strategies to address identified barriers were generated using Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategies and used in a second round of targeted coding, then assessed for degree of alignment to contextual barriers. RESULTS: Four enablers, seven barriers, and three mixed factors were found, including perceived limitations in the confidential nature of the online messaging tool ('Design quality and packaging'), which had downstream challenges for the capacity to provide feedback about utilisation of Ethos ('Goals and Feedback', 'Access to Knowledge and Information'). Fourteen recommended implementation strategies were used, however, only four of these were operationalised to completely address contextual barriers. CONCLUSION: Aspects of the inner setting (e.g., 'Leadership Engagement', 'Tension for Change') had the greatest influence on implementation and should be considered prior to the implementation of future professional accountability programs. Theory can improve understanding of factors affecting implementation, and support strategies to address them.

Changes in unprofessional behaviour, teamwork and co-operation among hospital staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A survey administered to staff at five hospitals investigated changes in unprofessional behaviour, teamwork and co-operation during the COVID-19 pandemic. From 1583 responses, 76.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 74.0-78.2%) reported no change or a decrease in unprofessional behaviours. Across all professional groups, 43.6% (n = 579, 95% CI: 41.0-46.3%) reported improvements in teamwork and co-operation. Findings suggest that intensifying work demands, such as those resulting from the pandemic, are not a major trigger for unprofessional behaviour, and root causes lie elsewhere.

The prevalence and impact of unprofessional behaviour among hospital workers: a survey in seven Australian hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To identify individual and organisational factors associated with the prevalence, type and impact of unprofessional behaviours among hospital employees. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Staff in seven metropolitan tertiary hospitals operated by one health care provider in three states were surveyed (Dec 2017 - Nov 2018) about their experience of unprofessional behaviours - 21 classified as incivility or bullying and five as extreme unprofessional behaviour (eg, sexual or physical assault) - and their perceived impact on personal wellbeing, teamwork and care quality, as well as about their speaking-up skills. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of experiencing 26 unprofessional behaviours during the preceding 12 months; factors associated with experiencing unprofessional behaviour and its impact, including self-reported speaking-up skills. RESULTS: Valid surveys (more than 60% of questions answered) were submitted by 5178 of an estimated 15 213 staff members (response rate, 34.0%). 4846 respondents (93.6%; 95% CI, 92.9-94.2%) reported experiencing at least one unprofessional behaviour during the preceding year, including 2009 (38.8%; 95% CI, 37.5-40.1%) who reported weekly or more frequent incivility or bullying; 753 (14.5%; 95% CI, 13.6-15.5%) reported extreme unprofessional behaviour. Nurses and non-clinical staff members aged 25-34 years reported incivility/bullying and extreme behaviour more often than other staff and age groups respectively. Staff with self-reported speaking-up skills experienced less incivility/bullying (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.46-0.61) and extreme behaviour (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.97), and also less frequently an impact on their personal wellbeing (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.38-0.51). CONCLUSIONS: Unprofessional behaviour is common among hospital workers. Tolerance for low level poor behaviour may be an enabler for more serious misbehaviour that endangers staff wellbeing and patient safety. Training staff about speaking up is required, together with organisational processes for effectively eliminating unprofessional behaviour.

Are operating room distractions, interruptions and disruptions associated with performance and patient safety? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The operating room is a complex environment in which distractions, interruptions and disruptions (DIDs) are frequent. Our aim was to synthesize research on the relationships between DIDs and (i) operative duration, (ii) team performance, (iii) individual performance and (iv) patient safety outcomes in order to better understand how interventions can be designed to mitigate the negative effects of DIDs. METHODS: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO) and reference lists were systematically searched. Included studies were required to report the quantitative outcomes of the association between DIDs and team performance, individual performance and patient safety. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed on a subset of studies reporting total operative time and DIDs. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were identified. The majority were prospective observational studies (n = 15) of moderate quality. DIDs were often defined, measured and interpreted differently in studies. DIDs were significantly associated with extended operative duration (n = 8), impaired team performance (n = 6), self-reported errors by colleagues (n = 1), surgical errors (n = 1), increased risk and incidence of surgical site infection (n = 4) and fewer patient safety checks (n = 1). A random-effects meta-analysis showed that the proportion of total operative time due to DIDs was 22.0% (95% confidence interval 15.7-29.9). CONCLUSION: DIDs in surgery are associated with a range of negative outcomes. However, significant knowledge gaps exist about the mechanisms that underlie these relationships, as well as the potential clinical and non-clinical benefits that DIDs may deliver. Available evidence indicates that interventions to reduce the negative effects of DIDs are warranted, but current evidence is not sufficient to make recommendations about potentially useful interventions.

Observational Tools That Quantify Nontechnical Skills in the Operating Room: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Errors and adverse events in the operating room (OR) are associated with not only poor technical performance but also deficits in nontechnical skills (NTSs). Numerous tools have been developed to assess NTS in the OR. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of observational tools and report on their implementation and psychometric properties to guide healthcare professionals, educators, and researchers in tool selection and use. METHODS: A systematic literature search (January 1, 1990-May 28, 2019) was conducted across databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) and reference lists of included studies. Reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, assessed study quality, and extracted data. RESULTS: Thirty-one tools were identified across 88 studies, most commonly conducted in a real-world OR (n = 50), involving two observers (n = 50). The NTS of individuals (n = 62) were assessed more often than that of subteams (n = 21) or entire teams (n = 20). The NOn-Technical Skills for Surgeons demonstrated content validity, concurrent validity, predictive validity, and face validity across a range of studies. Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills demonstrated content validity, concurrent validity, and predictive validity with good inter-rater reliability and test-retest validity. CONCLUSIONS: The NOn-Technical Skills for Surgeons has the strongest evidence of validity and reliability for assessing individuals, whereas the most robust tool for evaluating teams was Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills. We recommend continued investigation of these observational tools regarding their feasibility and reproducibility of methods. Further research is needed to determine the training requirements for observers and the potential of video and audio recordings in the OR.

Are two-person checks more effective than one-person checks for safety critical tasks in high-consequence industries outside of healthcare? A systematic review.

Double-checking has been used in high-consequence industries for decades. We aimed to determine the strength of the evidence-base regarding the effectiveness of double-checking which underpins its widespread adoption. We searched for quantitative studies of the effectiveness of two-person checking in industry sectors, excluding healthcare. We performed a systematic literature search across six databases and hand-searched key journals. We completed a narrative synthesis and quality assessment of the nine studies identified. Most studies were of fair quality. Two examined the use of two-person checks in aviation, three investigated tasks in chemical manufacturing, and four studies in psychology involved proofreading and visual search tasks. All studies found that the performance of two-people checking was not superior to that of one-person in detecting errors. Further research to compare the effectiveness of different checking processes along with factors which may support optimisation of safety checks in high-consequence industries is required.

Experiences of peer messengers as part of a professional accountability culture change program to reduce unprofessional behaviour: a cross-sectional study across eight hospitals.

Objective Professional accountability programs are designed to promote professional behaviours between co-workers and improve organisational culture. Peer messengers play a key role in professional accountability programs by providing informal feedback to hospital staff about their behaviour. Little is known about the experiences of messengers. This study examined the experiences of staff who delivered messages to peers as part of a whole-of-hospital professional accountability program called 'Ethos'. Methods Ethos messengers (EMs) across eight Australian hospitals were invited to complete an online survey. The survey consisted of 17 close-ended questions asking respondents about their experiences delivering messages to peers and their perceptions of the Ethos program. Four open-ended questions asked respondents about rewarding and challenging aspects of being a peer messenger and what they would change about the program. Results Sixty EMs provided responses to the survey (response rate, 41.4%). The majority were from nursing and medical groups (53.4%) and had delivered 1-5 messages to staff (57.7%). Time as an EM ranged from less than 3 months to more than 12 months. A majority had been an EM for more than 12 months (80%; n = 40). Most agreed they had received sufficient training for the role (90.1%; n = 48) and had the skills (90.1%; n = 48), access to support (84.9%; n = 45) and time to fulfil their responsibilities (70.0%; n = 30). Approximately a third (34.9%; n = 15) of respondents indicated that recipients were 'sometimes' or 'never' receptive to messages. Challenging aspects of the role included organising a time to talk with staff, delivering feedback effectively and communicating with peers who lacked insight and were unable to reflect on their behaviour. Conclusions Skills development for peer messengers is key to ensuring the effectiveness and sustainability of professional accountability programs. Training in how to deliver difficult information and respond to negative reactions to feedback was identified by EMs as essential to support their ongoing effectiveness in their role.

Hospital staff reports of coworker positive and unprofessional behaviours across eight hospitals: who reports what about whom?

BACKGROUND: Workplace behaviours of healthcare staff impact patient safety, staff well-being and organisational outcomes. A whole-of-hospital culture change programme, Ethos, was implemented by St. Vincent's Health Australia across eight hospitals. Ethos includes a secure online submission system that allows staff across all professional groups to report positive (Feedback for Recognition) and negative (Feedback for Reflection) coworker behaviours. We analysed these submissions to determine patterns and rates of submissions and identify the coworker behaviours reported. METHOD: All Ethos submissions between 2017 and 2020 were deidentified and analysed. Submissions include structured data elements (eg, professional role of the reporter and subjects, event and report dates) and a narrative account of the event and coworker behaviours. Descriptive statistics were calculated to assess use and reporting patterns. Coding of the content of submissions was performed to classify types of reported coworker behaviours. RESULTS: There were a total of 2504 Ethos submissions, including 1194 (47.7%) Recognition and 1310 (52.3%) Reflection submissions. Use of the submission tool was highest among nurses (20.14 submissions/100 nursing staff) and lowest among non-clinical services staff (5.07/100 non-clinical services staff). Nurses were most frequently the subject of Recognition submissions (7.56/100 nurses) while management and administrative staff were the least (4.25/100 staff). Frequently reported positive coworker behaviours were non-technical skills (79.3%, N=947); values-driven behaviours (72.5%, N=866); and actions that enhanced patient care (51.3%, N=612). Medical staff were the most frequent subjects of Reflection submissions (12.59/100 medical staff), and non-clinical services staff the least (4.53/100 staff). Overall, the most frequently reported unprofessional behaviours were being rude (53.8%, N=705); humiliating or ridiculing others (26%, N=346); and ignoring others' opinions (24.6%, N=322). CONCLUSION: Hospital staff across all professional groups used the Ethos messaging system to report both positive and negative coworker behaviours. High rates of Recognition submissions demonstrate a strong desire of staff to reward and encourage positive workplace behaviours, highlighting the importance of culture change programmes which emphasise these behaviours. The unprofessional behaviours identified in submissions are consistent with behaviours previously reported in surveys of hospital staff, suggesting that submissions are a reliable indicator of staff experiences.

Student and clinician perceptions of medical student mistreatment: a cross-sectional vignette survey.

OBJECTIVES: The mistreatment of medical students remains pervasive in medical education. Understanding the extent to which clinicians and students recognise mistreatment can assist in creating targeted interventions that reduce mistreatment. The objective of this study was to use clinical vignettes to assess perceptions of medical student mistreatment among medical students and clinical faculty at an Australian university. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used a survey of medical students and clinical faculty in a Doctor of Medicine (MD) programme at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. Data were collected via an online survey between 13 July and 27 July 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Fourteen clinical vignettes were developed based on commonly reported themes of mistreatment. An additional control vignette was also included, and these 15 vignettes were distributed via email to all 169 MD students and 42 teaching faculty at this teaching site. Participants were asked to rate whether the vignettes portrayed mistreatment on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). RESULTS: Respondents included 83 MD students and 34 clinical faculty. On average, students perceived mistreatment in 9 of 14 vignettes and faculty in 8 of 14 vignettes. Faculty and student perceptions aligned in themes of sexual abuse, physical abuse and in the control vignette depicting a constructive teaching style. Perceptions differed significantly between faculty and students (p<0.05) for five vignettes across the themes of gender discrimination, requests of students to perform non-educational tasks, humiliation, specialty choice discrimination and requests to perform a task beyond the student's capacity. CONCLUSION: Agreement on what constitutes appropriate behaviour is crucial to ensuring that a culture of mistreatment can be replaced with one of kindness, equity and respect. This study demonstrated the successful use of vignettes to compare perceptions of mistreatment, with faculty and student perceptions differing across a variety of themes.

Is Gaining Affective Commitment the Missing Strategy for Successful Change Management in Healthcare?

Despite the requirement for continual change and development, change failure is omnipresent in health care, ranging from small technical errors within new systems, processes or technologies, through to breakdowns and large-scale disaster. Despite decades of research investment, consultancy and initiatives, creating a healthcare context that promotes clinician engagement with change remains elusive, with limited demonstrated progress. Affective commitment to change refers to commitment that is driven by a desire to support change based on its perceived benefits or value, as opposed to commitment that is based on a sense of obligation or the minimization of costs. Recent evidence from health-care contexts indicates that affective commitment to change drives change readiness more so than the individual's self-efficacy for dealing with the change. Considering evidence regarding the effect of affective commitment to change on individual and collective change readiness among health-care staff, we may need to reorient our current strategies for managing change. We explore the opportunities to enhance affective commitment to change and, in turn, change readiness through adopting values-based approaches to designing and executing change proposals with clinicians and service users.

Creating a culture of safety and respect through professional accountability: case study of the Ethos program across eight Australian hospitals.

Behaviour that is disrespectful towards others occurs frequently in hospitals, negatively impacts staff, and may undermine patient care. Professional accountability programs may address unprofessional behaviour by staff. This article examines a whole-of-hospital program, Ethos, developed by St Vincent's Health Australia to address unprofessional behaviour, encourage speaking up, and improve organisational culture. Ethos consists of a bundle of tools, training, and resources, including an online system where staff can make submissions regarding their co-workers' exemplary or unprofessional behaviour. Informal feedback is provided to the subject of the submission to recognise or encourage reflection on their behaviour. Following implementation in eight St Vincent's Health Australia hospitals, the Ethos Messaging System has had 2497 submissions, 54% about positive behaviours. Peer messengers who deliver 'Feedback for Reflection' have faced practical challenges in providing feedback. Guidelines for the team who 'triage' Ethos messages have been revised to ensure only feedback that will promote reflection is passed on. Early evidence suggests Ethos has positively impacted staff, although evaluation is ongoing. The COVID-19 pandemic has required some adaptations to the program.

Toward Constructive Change After Making a Medical Error: Recovery From Situations of Error Theory as a Psychosocial Model for Clinician Recovery.

BACKGROUND: Making a medical error is a uniquely challenging psychosocial experience for clinicians. Feelings of personal responsibility, coupled with distress regarding potential or actual patient harm resulting from a mistake, create a dual burden. Over the past 20 years, experiential accounts of making an error have provided evidence of the associated distress and impacts. However, theory-based psychosocial support interventions to improve both individual outcomes for the involved clinicians and system-level outcomes, such as patient safety and workforce retention, are lacking. There is a need for evidence-based ways to both structure and evaluate interventions to decrease the distress of making a medical error and its impacts. Such interventions play a role within wider programs of health professional support. We sought to address this by developing a testable, psychosocial model of clinician recovery after error based on recent evidence. METHODS: Systematic review methodology was used to identify studies published between January 2010 and June 2021 reporting experiences of direct involvement in medical errors and/or subsequent recovery. A narrative synthesis was produced from the resulting articles and used as the basis for a team-based qualitative approach to model building. RESULTS: We identified 25 studies eligible for inclusion, reporting evidence primarily from experiences of doctors and nurses. The identified evidence indicates that coping approach, conversations (whether they occur and whether they are perceived to be helpful or unhelpful), and learning or development activities (helpful, unhelpful or absent) may influence the relationship between making an error and both individual clinician outcomes of emotional impact and resultant practice change. Our findings led to the development of the Recovery from Situations of Error Theory model, which provides a preliminary theoretical basis for intervention development and testing. CONCLUSIONS: The Recovery from Situations of Error Theory model is the first testable psychosocial model of clinician recovery after making a medical error. Applying this model provides a basis to both structure and evaluate interventions to decrease the distress of making a medical error and its impacts and to support the replication of interventions that work across services and health systems toward constructive change. Such interventions may be embedded into the growing body of peer support and employee support programs internationally that address a diverse range of stressful workplace experiences.

The relationships between health anxiety, online health information seeking, and cyberchondria: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cyberchondria refers to an abnormal behavioral pattern in which excessive or repeated online searches for health-related information are distressing or anxiety-provoking. Health anxiety has been found to be associated with both online health information seeking and cyberchondria. The aims of the present systematic review and meta-analysis were to examine the magnitude of these associations and identify any moderator variables. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed across several databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase) and reference lists of included studies. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included across two independent meta-analyses, with 7373 participants. Random effects meta-analyses showed that there was a positive correlation between health anxiety and online health information seeking [r = 0.34, 95% CI (0.20, 0.48), p < .0001], and between health anxiety and cyberchondria [r = 0.62, 95% CI (0.52, 0.71), p < .0001]. A meta-regression indicated that the age of study participants [Q(1) = 4.58, p = .03] was partly responsible for the heterogeneity found for the relationship between health anxiety and cyberchondria. LIMITATIONS: The generalizability and validity of our findings are restricted by the methodological limitations of the primary studies, namely, an over-reliance on a single measure of cyberchondria, the Cyberchondria Severity Scale. CONCLUSIONS: Our review found a positive correlation between health anxiety and online health information seeking, and between health anxiety and cyberchondria. Further research should aim to explore the contexts for these associations as well as address the identified limitations of the extant literature.

The thalamus as a relay station and gatekeeper: relevance to brain disorders.

Here, we provide a review of behavioural, cognitive, and neural studies of the thalamus, including its role in attention, consciousness, sleep, and motor processes. We further discuss neuropsychological and brain disorders associated with thalamus function, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Korsakoff's syndrome, and sleep disorders. Importantly, we highlight how thalamus-related processes and disorders can be explained by the role of the thalamus as a relay station.