Disruptive behaviors among nurses in Israel - association with listening, wellbeing and feeling as a victim: a cross-sectional study

Issues and Perspectives for the Study of Disruptive Clinician Behavior

This article discusses issues and perspectives related to the study of disruptive clinician behavior (DCB) to improve patient safety and healthcare professionals' work environments. Multiple terminologies and ambiguous definitions have resulted in conceptual confusion in studies on DCB. In addition, subjective classifications have led the attributes of DCB to overlap and fluctuate. Therefore, we share Rosenberg's definition of DCB as "any inappropriate behavior, confrontation, or conflict, ranging from verbal abuse to physical and sexual harassment." It is recommended that DCB be understood as a hierarchical structure identified through statistical analysis of field survey data. Furthermore, a recurring list of items is duplicated across existing studies on DCB triggers, contributing factors, and influences. These items can be organized into separate path models based on their mutual relationships. Given these assumed models, we believe that further studies on DCB can shift toward elucidating the mechanisms of occurrence and impact. Finally, based on the path models, we recommend improving healthcare professionals' psychological and social states through a policy shift from "zero-tolerance" to "to err is human" as a priority issue for DCB prevention and countermeasures.

Association of quality of nursing care with violence load, burnout, and listening climate

BACKGROUND

Violence against nurses is common. Previous research has recommended further development of the measurement of violence against nurses and integration of the individual and ward-related factors that contribute to violence against hospital nurses. This study was designed to address these issues by investigating the associations between violence, the listening climate of hospital wards, professional burnout, and perceived quality of care. For this purpose, we used a new operationalization of the violence concept.

METHODS

We sought nurses to participate in the study through social media which yielded 765 nurses working in various healthcare systems across Israel who volunteered to complete a self-administered online questionnaire. 80% of the sample were hospital nurses, and 84.7% were female. The questionnaire included validated measures of burnout, listening climate, and quality of care. Instead of using the traditional binary measure of exposure to violence to capture the occurrence and comprehensive impact of violence, this study measured the incremental load of violence to which nurses are subjected.

RESULTS

There were significant correlations between violence load and perceived quality of care and between constructive and destructive listening climates and quality of care. Violence load contributed 14% to the variance of burnout and 13% to the variance of perceived quality of care. The ward listening climate moderated the relationship between burnout and quality of care.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study highlight the impact of violence load among nurses and the ward listening climate on the development of burnout and on providing quality care. The findings call upon policymakers to monitor violence load and allocate resources to foster supportive work environments to enhance nurse well-being and improve patient care outcomes.

Development of a Psychological Scale for Measuring Disruptive Clinician Behavior

OBJECTIVES

Disruptive clinician behavior worsens communication, information transfer, and teamwork, all of which negatively affect patient safety. Improving safety in medical care requires an accurate assessment of the damage caused by disruptive clinician behavior. Psychometric scales complement case reports, but existing scales have significant limitations. Therefore, this study developed a psychometric scale based on the psychological paradigm to assess disruptive clinician behavior.

METHODS

The scale was developed through a sequence of steps. First, we used an open-ended questionnaire targeting 712 nurses, content analysis, and content validity assessment by 5 experts to determine valid items for disruptive clinical behavior. Next, an Internet questionnaire survey targeting 1000 health care staff, exploratory factor analysis, and subfactor analysis was conducted to identify necessary and sufficient factors. Then, we calculated difficulty level and discriminative power. We also conducted a field questionnaire survey targeting 84 staff in a hospital. Finally, we calculated ω coefficients and then used confirmatory factor analysis to verify the fit of the hypothesized model.

RESULTS

Our open-ended survey involving 478 nurses identified 47 codes in 9 categories. The questionnaire survey involving hospital 1000 medical staff identified 6 factors, with 1 factor subdivided into 4 subfactors and 1 into 2 subfactors. The goodness of fit of the hypothesized 10-factor models with factor pairs and groups was confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a psychometric scale measuring subjective assessments of harm covering various disruptive clinician behaviors. The scale complements interviews and case reports by generating valid, reliable scores for various disruptive clinician behaviors in health care institutions.

The Power of Listening at Work

Listening is associated with and a likely cause of desired organizational outcomes in numerous areas, including job performance, leadership, quality of relationships (e.g., trust), job knowledge, job attitudes, and well-being. To advance understanding of the powerful effects of listening on organizational outcomes, we review the construct of listening, its measurement and experimental manipulations, and its outcomes, antecedents, and moderators. We suggest that listening is a dyadic phenomenon that benefits both the listener and the speaker, including supervisor-subordinate and salesperson-customer dyads. To explain previous findings and generate novel and testable hypotheses, we propose the episodic listening theory: listening can lead to a fleeting state of togetherness, in which dyad members undergo a mutual creative thought process. This process yields clarity, facilitates the generation of novel plans, increases well-being, and strengthens attachment to the conversation partner.

Predictors and triggers of incivility within healthcare teams: a systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

To explore predictors and triggers of incivility in medical teams, defined as behaviours that violate norms of respect but whose intent to harm is ambiguous.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review of quantitative and qualitative empirical studies.

DATA SOURCES

Database searches according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline in Medline, CINHAL, PsychInfo, Web of Science and Embase up to January 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Original empirical quantitative and qualitative studies focusing on predictors and triggers of incivilities in hospital healthcare teams, excluding psychiatric care.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Of the 1397 publications screened, 53 were included (44 quantitative and 9 qualitative studies); publication date ranged from 2002 to January 2020.

RESULTS

Based on the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) scores, the quality of the quantitative studies were relatively low overall (mean MERSQI score of 9.93), but quality of studies increased with publication year (r=0.52; p<0.001). Initiators of incivility were consistently described as having a difficult personality, yet few studies investigated their other characteristics and motivations. Results were mostly inconsistent regarding individual characteristics of targets of incivilities (eg, age, gender, ethnicity), but less experienced healthcare professionals were more exposed to incivility. In most studies, participants reported experiencing incivilities mainly within their own professional discipline (eg, nurse to nurse) rather than across disciplines (eg, physician to nurse). Evidence of specific medical specialties particularly affected by incivility was poor, with surgery as one of the most cited uncivil specialties. Finally, situational and cultural predictors of higher incivility levels included high workload, communication or coordination issues, patient safety concerns, lack of support and poor leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a wide range of predictors and triggers of incivilities are reported in the literature, identifying characteristics of initiators and the targets of incivilities yielded inconsistent results. The use of diverse and high-quality methods is needed to explore the dynamic nature of situational and cultural triggers of incivility.