Professional Standards for Specialist Medical Administrators: Over-the-top Downunder?

In Australia, there are only two publicly reported disciplinary cases against specialist medical administrators. In the most recent decision of Medical Board of Australia v Gruner, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal confirmed that specialist medical administrators owe patients and the public the same professional obligations as medical practitioners with direct patient contact. More controversially, the Tribunal also held that medical administrators have a professional obligation only to accept roles with clear position descriptions that afford them sufficient time and resources to ensure the safe delivery of health services. We argue that this imposes unrealistic expectations on medical administrators engaged by rural, regional, or private health services that already struggle to attract and retain specialist medical expertise. This may exacerbate existing health inequalities by disincentivising specialist medical administrators from seeking fractional appointments that assist under-funded areas of workforce shortage.

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.

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.

Australian doctors are more engaged than UK doctors: why is this the case?

BACKGROUND: Despite reports highlighting the need for greater medical engagement and the benefits of being widely understood, very little information is available on the status of medical engagement in Australia, and how this compares to the UK. Answering this question will no doubt assist training bodies, curriculum designers and policy makers better understand relevant issues. METHODS: The medical engagement questionnaire (MES) was emailed to all medical staff working at 159 UK National Health Service Trusts and 18 health service organisations in Australia. The questionnaire consists of 30 predetermined items seeking responses using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Overall, doctors in the Australian dataset are slightly more engaged, or more positive, than their UK colleagues. Good interpersonal relationships was the only variable that UK doctors scored more positively than their Australian counterparts. At the lower end of the responses, that is the least engaged, we found this even more apparent. Where doctors in Australia are less disengaged, that is still more positive than the UK colleagues. CONCLUSION: While the profiles of medical engagement vary at the sites and also across the MES and subscales, the data illustrate that overall doctors in Australia feel valued and empowered, and they have purpose and direction and work in a collaborate culture. At the most disengaged end of the scale, Australian doctors are markedly less disengaged than their UK counterparts. There may be numerous factors that influence and change how engaged doctors are in both countries. The most prominent of these are appear to be working conditions and lifestyle, driven by funding and other economics issues. This research is likely to be of great interest to regulators and training bodies in both countries.

Case for mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations for workers in health and aged care settings: a guide for leaders.

BACKGROUND: This brief paper provides an overview of the analysis in support of mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for all workers in health and aged care settings in Australia. Leaders of health and aged care organisations have a duty of care under work health and safety legislation to eliminate and/or control the risk of transmission of vaccine-preventable disease in their facilities, including COVID-19. METHODS: Key issues that should be considered by healthcare leaders when mandating that all health and aged care workers be vaccinated against COVID-19 were analysed by executives from a large Australian national health and aged care provider and discussed in this paper. RESULTS: This paper summarises the medical/scientific, ethical, legal, work health and safety, workers' compensation and industrial relations considerations when mandating COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers. CONCLUSION: Leaders of health and aged care organisations must provide a safe environment and workplace for all those who work for them, as well as for those who receive care or treatment at one of their facilities. It is hoped that this paper will assist leaders of healthcare organisations in making their own decisions during this time.

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.

Factors that influence and change medical engagement in Australian not for profit hospitals.

PURPOSE: The study aims to assess medical engagement levels at two teaching hospitals and a 500 bed private hospital in two states operated by the same health care provider and to describe individual and organisational factors that influence and change medical engagement. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A survey was emailed to all junior and senior medical staff, seeking responses to 30 pre-determined items. The survey used a valid and reliable instrument which provided an overall index of medical engagement. Qualitative data were also collected by including an open ended question. FINDINGS: Doctors (n = 810) working at all sites are in the top 20-40 percentile when compared to Australia and the United Kingdom. Two sites in one state were in the highest relative engagement band with the other being in the high relative range when compared to the (UK) and the medium relative band when compared to sites in Australia. Senior doctors working at all three were less engaged on feeling valued and empowered, when compared to having purpose and direction or working in a collaborative culture. This appears to be related to work satisfaction and whether they feel encouraged to develop their skills and progress their careers. Junior doctors at 1 site are much less engaged than colleagues working at another. Since their formal training pathways are identical the informal training experience appears to be an engagement factor. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Despite medical engagement being recognised as crucial, little is known about individual and organisational factors that support doctors to be engaged, particularly for juniors and in the private sector.

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.

Guidance for Health Care Leaders During the Recovery Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest global test of health leadership of our generation. There is an urgent need to provide guidance for leaders at all levels during the unprecedented preresolution recovery stage. Objective: To create an evidence- and expertise-informed framework of leadership imperatives to serve as a resource to guide health and public health leaders during the postemergency stage of the pandemic. Evidence Review: A literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase revealed 10 910 articles published between 2000 and 2021 that included the terms leadership and variations of emergency, crisis, disaster, pandemic, COVID-19, or public health. Using the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence reporting guideline for consensus statement development, this assessment adopted a 6-round modified Delphi approach involving 32 expert coauthors from 17 countries who participated in creating and validating a framework outlining essential leadership imperatives. Findings: The 10 imperatives in the framework are: (1) acknowledge staff and celebrate successes; (2) provide support for staff well-being; (3) develop a clear understanding of the current local and global context, along with informed projections; (4) prepare for future emergencies (personnel, resources, protocols, contingency plans, coalitions, and training); (5) reassess priorities explicitly and regularly and provide purpose, meaning, and direction; (6) maximize team, organizational, and system performance and discuss enhancements; (7) manage the backlog of paused services and consider improvements while avoiding burnout and moral distress; (8) sustain learning, innovations, and collaborations, and imagine future possibilities; (9) provide regular communication and engender trust; and (10) in consultation with public health and fellow leaders, provide safety information and recommendations to government, other organizations, staff, and the community to improve equitable and integrated care and emergency preparedness systemwide. Conclusions and Relevance: Leaders who most effectively implement these imperatives are ideally positioned to address urgent needs and inequalities in health systems and to cocreate with their organizations a future that best serves stakeholders and communities.

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.

AI enabled suicide prediction tools: a qualitative narrative review.

Background: Suicide poses a significant health burden worldwide. In many cases, people at risk of suicide do not engage with their doctor or community due to concerns about stigmatisation and forced medical treatment; worse still, people with mental illness (who form a majority of people who die from suicide) may have poor insight into their mental state, and not self-identify as being at risk. These issues are exacerbated by the fact that doctors have difficulty in identifying those at risk of suicide when they do present to medical services. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) present opportunities for the development of novel tools for predicting suicide.Method: We searched Google Scholar and PubMed for articles relating to suicide prediction using artificial intelligence from 2017 onwards.Conclusions: This paper presents a qualitative narrative review of research focusing on two categories of suicide prediction tools: medical suicide prediction and social suicide prediction. Initial evidence is promising: AI-driven suicide prediction could improve our capacity to identify those at risk of suicide, and, potentially, save lives. Medical suicide prediction may be relatively uncontroversial when it pays respect to ethical and legal principles; however, further research is required to determine the validity of these tools in different contexts. Social suicide prediction offers an exciting opportunity to help identify suicide risk among those who do not engage with traditional health services. Yet, efforts by private companies such as Facebook to use online data for suicide prediction should be the subject of independent review and oversight to confirm safety, effectiveness and ethical permissibility.

Sharing the pain: lessons from missed opportunities for healthcare improvement from patient complaints and litigation in the Australian health system.

Learning from medical errors to prevent their recurrence is an important component of any healthcare system's quality and safety improvement functions. Traditionally, this been achieved principally from review of adverse clinical outcomes. The opportunity to learn systematically and in a system manner from patient complaints and litigation has been less well harnessed. Herein we describe the pathways and processes for both patient complaints and medicolegal claims in Victoria, and Australia more broadly, and assess the potential for these to be used for system improvement. We conclude that both patient complaints and medicolegal claims could afford the potential to additionally inform and direct safety and quality improvement. At present neither patient complaints nor medicolegal claims are used systematically to improve patient safety. We identify how this may be done, particularly through sharing findings across agencies.

Medical management and leadership: a time of transition?

Perspectives on medical management and leadership are in a time of transition, but there is much we still need to understand better. This paper explores some of the tensions and dilemmas inherent in understandings of medical management and leadership.

Shining the light on the dark side of medical leadership - a qualitative study in Australia.

Purpose The paper aims to explore the beliefs of doctors in leadership roles of the concept of "the dark side", using data collected from interviews carried out with 45 doctors in medical leadership roles across Australia. The paper looks at the beliefs from the perspectives of doctors who are already in leadership roles themselves; to identify potential barriers they might have encountered and to arrive at better-informed strategies to engage more doctors in the leadership of the Australian health system. The research question is: "What are the beliefs of medical leaders that form the key themes or dimensions of the negative perception of the 'dark side'?". Design/methodology/approach The paper analysed data from two similar qualitative studies examining medical leadership and engagement in Australia by the same author, in collaboration with other researchers, which used in-depth semi-structured interviews with 45 purposively sampled senior medical leaders in leadership roles across Australia in health services, private and public hospitals, professional associations and health departments. The data were analysed using deductive and inductive approaches through a coding framework based on the interview data and literature review, with all sections of coded data grouped into themes. Findings Medical leaders had four key beliefs about the "dark side" as perceived through the eyes of their own past clinical experience and/or their clinical colleagues. These four beliefs or dimensions of the negative perception colloquially known as "the dark side" are the belief that they lack both managerial and clinical credibility, they have confused identities, they may be in conflict with clinicians, their clinical colleagues lack insight into the complexities of medical leadership and, as a result, doctors are actively discouraged from making the transition from clinical practice to medical leadership roles in the first place. Research limitations/implications This research was conducted within the Western developed-nation setting of Australia and only involved interviews with doctors in medical leadership roles. The findings are therefore limited to the doctors' own perceptions of themselves based on their past experiences and beliefs. Future research involving doctors who have not chosen to transition to leadership roles, or other health practitioners in other settings, may provide a broader perspective. Also, this research was exploratory and descriptive in nature using qualitative methods, and quantitative research can be carried out in the future to extend this research for statistical generalisation. Practical implications The paper includes implications for health organisations, training providers, medical employers and health departments and describes a multi-prong strategy to address this important issue. Originality/value This paper fulfils an identified need to study the concept of "moving to the dark side" as a negative perception of medical leadership and contributes to the evidence in this under-researched area. This paper has used data from two similar studies, combined together for the first time, with new analysis and coding, looking at the concept of the "dark side" to discover new emergent findings.

Pharmaceutical industry exposure in our hospitals: the final frontier.

Despite recent changes in attitudes, most hospitals continue to experience pharmaceutical industry presence. Pharmaceutical industry presence may be necessary and beneficial in the context of sponsorship of clinical trials with appropriate governance. Doctors continue to hold positive attitudes towards market-oriented activities of the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. Despite evidence to the contrary, doctors believe they are able to effectively manage pharmaceutical sales representative interactions such that their own prescribing is not adversely impacted. Doctors also share a belief that small gifts and benefits are harmless. There may be significant financial burden associated with divestment of such sponsorship by hospitals. Change requires education and effective policies to manage pharmaceutical industry relationships and conflicts of interest. We discuss case studies involving students and public hospital doctors to show that divestment is possible without significant financial detriment. Health services need to be proactive in transitioning financial and cultural reliance on pharmaceutical industry sponsorship to other potentially less harmful sources.