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.

Unprofessional behaviours experienced by hospital staff: qualitative analysis of narrative comments in a longitudinal survey across seven hospitals in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Unprofessional behaviours of healthcare staff have negative impacts on organisational outcomes, patient safety and staff well-being. The objective of this study was to undertake a qualitative analysis of narrative responses from the Longitudinal Investigation of Negative Behaviours survey (LION), to develop a comprehensive understanding of hospital staff experiences of unprofessional behaviours and their impact on staff and patients. The LION survey identified staff experiences and perceptions related to unprofessional behaviours within hospitals. METHODS: Two open-ended questions within the LION survey invited descriptions of unprofessional staff behaviours across seven hospitals in three Australian states between December 2017 and November 2018. Respondents were from medical, nursing, allied health, management, and support services roles in the hospitals. Data were qualitatively analysed using Directed Content Analysis (DCA). RESULTS: From 5178 LION survey responses, 32% (n = 1636) of participants responded to the two open-ended questions exploring staff experiences of unprofessional behaviours across the hospital sites surveyed. Three primary themes and 11 secondary themes were identified spanning, i) individual unprofessional behaviours, ii) negative impacts of unprofessional behaviours on staff well-being, psychological safety, and employee experience, as well as on patient care, well-being, and safety, and iii) organisational factors associated with staff unprofessional behaviours. CONCLUSION: Unprofessional behaviours are experienced by hospital staff across all professional groups and functions. Staff conceptualise, perceive and experience unprofessional behaviours in diverse ways. These behaviours can be understood as enactments that either negatively impact other staff, patients or the organisational outcomes of team cohesion, work efficiency and efficacy. A perceived lack of organisational action based on existing reporting and employee feedback appears to erode employee confidence in hospital leaders and their ability to effectively address and mitigate unprofessional behaviours.

The impact of vulnerability and exposure to pervasive interprofessional incivility among medical staff on wellbeing.

Introduction: Traditional methods for modelling human interactions within organisational contexts are often hindered by the complexity inherent within these systems. Building on new approaches to information modelling in the social sciences and drawing on the work of scholars in transdisciplinary fields, we proposed that a reliable model of human interaction as well as its emergent properties can be demonstrated using theories related to emergent information. Methods: We demonstrated these dynamics through a test case related to data from a prevalence survey of incivility among medical staff. For each survey respondent we defined their vulnerability profile based upon a combination of their biographical characteristics, such as age, gender, and length of employment within a hospital and the hospital type (private or public). We modelled the interactions between the composite vulnerability profile of staff against their reports of their exposure to incivility and the consequent negative impact on their wellbeing. Results: We found that vulnerability profile appeared to be proportionally related to the extent to which they were exposed to rudeness in the workplace and to a negative impact on subjective wellbeing. Discussion: This model can potentially be used to tailor resources to improve the wellbeing of hospital medical staff at increased risk of facing incivility, bullying and harassment at their workplaces.

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.

An assessment of organisational culture in Australian hospitals using employee online reviews.

The aim of this study was to analyse the content of online reviews posted by hospital employees on job websites for themes of organisational culture. 103 anonymous online reviews across three job websites, posted by hospital employees of four hospitals within an Australian health network were extracted. Reviews had been posted across a period of six years, from 2014 to early 2020. Sentiment rating based on user-allotted ratings on the selected websites was calculated. The sentiment score was validated against the textual content of the review to confirm employee recommendation and sentiment. Sentiment was coded as neutral, positive, or negative. Significant keywords, associations, and usage within the context of identified sentiment were deductively coded and clustered manually against eight pre-determined safety culture themes. These themes were derived from the most used assessment tools for self-reported measures of occupational health and safety, and safety culture in healthcare. Workers across clinical roles (n = 49) and non-clinical roles (n = 50) were evenly represented in the dataset. 35.9% of commenters (n = 37) reported their length of employment in the hospitals that they reviewed. Most online employee reviews addressed broad themes related to perceptions of management (n = 98), safety climate (n = 97), teamwork climate (n = 91) and working conditions (n = 98). A significant set of reviews addressed themes related to job satisfaction (n = 49) and learning, training, and development (n = 41). 72.8% of online reviews (n = 75) expressed positive sentiment towards their employer. Reviews expressing negative sentiment were largely posted by former employees and indicated areas of discontent that reflected organisational and systemic factors. Online employee reviews posted by hospital workers on job sites provide valuable insights into healthcare organisational culture. Therefore, employee online reviews could be used as a supplementary source of data to inform organisational employee engagement initiatives.

Speaking up as an extension of socio-cultural dynamics in hospital settings: a study of staff experiences of speaking up across seven hospitals.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to understand the significance of how employee personhood and the act of speaking up is shaped by factors such as employees' professional status, length of employment within their hospital sites, age, gender and their ongoing exposure to unprofessional behaviours. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Responses to a survey by 4,851 staff across seven sites within a hospital network in Australia were analysed to interrogate whether speaking up by hospital employees is influenced by employees' symbolic capital and situated subjecthood (SS). The authors utilised a Bourdieusian lens to interrogate the relationship between the symbolic capital afforded to employees as a function of their professional, personal and psycho-social resources and their self-reported capacity to speak up. FINDINGS: The findings indicate that employee speaking up behaviours appear to be influenced profoundly by whether they feel empowered or disempowered by ongoing and pre-existing personal and interpersonal factors such as their functional roles, work-based peer and supervisory support and ongoing exposure to discriminatory behaviours. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The findings from this interdisciplinary study provide empirical insights around why culture change interventions within healthcare organisations may be successful in certain contexts for certain staff groups and fail within others.

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.

Towards developing a comprehensive conceptual understanding of positive hospital culture and approaches to healthcare organisational culture change in Australia.

PURPOSE: The key aim of this narrative literature review, therefore, is to identify the key conceptual categories that inform the construction of positive person-centred culture within hospitals, and how these frameworks are brought to bear upon organisational culture within healthcare systems in Australia. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This narrative review presents a thematic synthesis of literature identified through a systematic search protocol undertaken across 19 academic databases and Google Scholar as an additional search tool. Thematic qualitative analysis was performed on the research results to determine the common themes within the diverse literature presented within this study. FINDINGS: Culture change interventions in hospitals attempt to address the problem of widespread unprofessional behaviour within healthcare systems. However, diverse definitions and seemingly fragmented approaches to understanding and enacting organisational culture change present a significant hurdle in achieving cohesive and sustainable healthcare reform. This narrative literature review offers a comprehensive conceptual view of the key approaches that inform positive person-centred culture within hospital settings. In total, three primary dimensions, belonging, behaving and being, aligned against organisational goals, individual behaviours and worker as well as organisational identity were identified. Other individual and group interactional dynamics that give rise to negative organisational culture are further analysed to understand the fault lines along which existing culture change interventions are typically operationalised. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This review is not exhaustive and is limited in its methodological scope. The central values and themes identified within the literature are integral to designing humanised healthcare systems. However, owing to the qualitative nature and contextual variability of these factors, these themes do not lend themselves to replicable quantification. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This analysis contributes to foundational research efforts towards transforming healthcare practice to be more aligned with humanised and equitable values within increasingly complex healthcare organisational settings. Designing culture change interventions that align more suitably with the values-driven categories identified in this literature review may increase the effectiveness and sustainability of these interventions and reform efforts at organisational and systemic levels. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This article presents a comprehensive framework to approach healthcare organisational reform through shared and equitable models of operation, management and governance rather than continuing to promote narrowly defined outcomes derived from commodified models of healthcare practice.