Organisational failure: rethinking whistleblowing for tomorrow's doctors

Health professionals' experiences of whistleblowing in maternal and newborn healthcare settings: A scoping review and thematic analysis

PROBLEM

Whistleblowing, which involves raising concerns about wrongdoing, carries risks yet can be crucial to ensuring the safety of health service users in maternal and newborn healthcare settings. Understanding of the experiences of health care professionals that enact whistleblowing in this context is currently limited.

BACKGROUND

Notable inquiries involving maternity services such as those reported upon by Ockenden and Kirkup and the Lucy Letby case in the United Kingdom have shone an international spotlight on whistleblowing failures.

AIM

To identify and synthesise available literature addressing the experiences of healthcare professionals enacting whistleblowing in maternal and newborn care settings.

METHODS

This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Five academic databases were systematically searched for documents published between January 2013 and October 2023 with additional searches of Google Scholar and related reference lists.

FINDINGS

Whilst 35 papers from international sources were identified, the majority originated from the United Kingdom, where recent high-profile incidents have occurred. Thematic analysis identified three main themes: 'Structural Power', 'Perfectionism' and 'Bravery, Hope and Disappointment', each with sub-themes.

DISCUSSION

Whistleblowing is frequently an altruistic act in a hierarchical system. It exposes poor practices and disrupts power dynamics, especially in challenging workplace cultures. Open disclosure, however, requires psychological safety. Obstacles persist, emphasising the need for a culture of trust and transparency led by individuals who embody the desired values.

CONCLUSION

Primary research on whistleblowing in maternal and newborn healthcare settings is limited. This study sheds light on power dynamics and factors that affect whistleblowing.

Learning from experience: a qualitative study of surgeons' perspectives on reporting and dealing with serious adverse events

INTRODUCTION

In surgery, serious adverse events have effects on the patient journey, the patient outcome and may constitute a burden to the surgeon involved. This study aims to investigate facilitators and barriers to transparency around, reporting of and learning from serious adverse events among surgeons.

METHODS

Based on a qualitative study design, we recruited 15 surgeons (4 females and 11 males) with 4 different surgical subspecialties from four Norwegian university hospitals. The participants underwent individual semistructured interviews and data were analysed according to principles of inductive qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We identified four overarching themes. All surgeons reported having experienced serious adverse events, describing these as part of 'the nature of surgery'. Most surgeons reported that established strategies failed to combine facilitation of learning with taking care of the involved surgeons. Transparency about serious adverse events was by some felt as an extra burden, fearing that openness on technical-related errors could affect their future career negatively. Positive implications of transparency were linked with factors such as minimising the surgeon's feeling of personal burden with positive impact on individual and collective learning. A lack of facilitation of individual and structural transparency factors could entail 'collateral damage'. Our participants suggested that both the younger generation of surgeons in general, and the increasing number of women in surgical professions, might contribute to 'maturing' the culture of transparency.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This study suggests that transparency associated with serious adverse events is hampered by concerns at both personal and professional levels among surgeons. These results emphasise the importance of improved systemic learning and the need for structural changes; it is crucial to increase the focus on education and training curriculums and offer advice on coping strategies and establish arenas for safe discussions after serious adverse events.