Leadership & Professional Development: Specialty Silos in Medicine

Medical silos, social identity, and duty of care: A call for health leaders to improve transitions of care

This article explores the concept of medical silos, particularly within hospital systems, and examines their deeper roots in social identity and the fiduciary duty of care of healthcare providers. While traditional perspectives focus on informational and communication barriers, this analysis highlights how professional identity and moral obligations contribute to the persistence of silos. Social identity theory reveals that strong in-group affiliations, formed during medical training and specialization, fosters collaboration within groups but also create divisions between them. Similarly, the fiduciary duty of care, central to ethical medical practice, may inadvertently reinforce silo boundaries in resource-limited environments. By emphasizing the role of centralized leadership, the article proposes that health system managers and leaders, with the broadest possible duty of care, must take action to dismantle these barriers. Recommendations include re-evaluating policies for patient transitions and fostering integrated care pathways to improve overall system flow, rather than simply balancing the agendas of stakeholders within their silos.

Influences of specialty identity when implementing a new emergency department in Denmark: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The Danish Health Authority recommended the implementation of new types of emergency departments. Organizational changes in the hospital sector challenged the role, identity, and autonomy of medical specialists. They tend to identify with their specialty, which can challenge successful implementation of change. However, investigations on specialty identity are rare in implementation science, and how the co-existence of different specialty identities influences the implementation of new emergency departments needs to be explored for the development of tailored implementation strategies. The aim of this study was to examine how medical specialty identity influences collaboration between physicians when implementing a new emergency department in Denmark.

METHODS

Qualitative methods in the form of participants' observations at 13 oilcloth sessions (a micro-simulation method) were conducted followed up by 53 individual semi-structured interviews with participants from the oilcloth sessions. Out of the 53 interviews, 26 were conducted with specialists. Data from their interviews are included in this study. Data were analysed deductively inspired by Social Identity Theory.

RESULTS

The analysis yielded three overarching themes: [1] ongoing creation and re-creation of specialty identity through boundary drawing; [2] social categorization and power relations; and [3] the patient as a boundary object.

CONCLUSIONS

Specialty identity is an important determinant of collaboration among physicians when implementing a new emergency department. Specialty identity involves social categorization, which entails ongoing creation and re-creation of boundary drawing and exercising of power among the physicians. In some situations, the patient became a positive boundary object, increasing the possibility for a successful collaboration and supporting successful implementation, but direct expressions of boundaries and mistrust were evident. Both were manifested through a dominating power expressed through social categorization in the form of in- and out-groups and in an "us and them" discourse, which created distance and separation among physicians from different specialties. This distancing and separation became a barrier to the implementation of the new emergency department.

"Two Years Later I'm Still Just as Angry": A Focus Group Study of Emergency and Internal Medicine Physicians on Disrespectful Communication

Phenomenon: Disrespectful behavior between physicians across departments can contribute to burnout, poor learning environments, and adverse patient outcomes. Approach: In this focus group study, we aimed to describe the nature and context of perceived disrespectful communication between emergency and internal medicine physicians (residents and faculty) at patient handoff. We used a constructivist approach and framework method of content analysis to conduct and analyze focus group data from 24 residents and 11 faculty members from May to December 2019 at a large academic medical center. Findings: We organized focus group results into four overarching categories related to disrespectful communication: characteristics and context (including specific phrasing that members from each department interpreted as disrespectful, effects of listener engagement/disengagement, and the tendency for communication that is not in-person to result in misunderstanding and conflict); differences across training levels (with disrespectful communication more likely when participants were at different training levels); the individual correspondent's tendency toward perceived rudeness; and negative/long-term impacts of disrespectful communication on the individual and environment (including avoidance and effects on patient care). Insights: In the context of predominantly positive descriptions of interdepartmental communication, participants described episodes of perceived disrespectful behavior that often had long-lasting, negative impacts on the quality of the learning environment and clinical work. We created a conceptual model illustrating the process and outcomes of these interactions. We make several recommendations to reduce disrespectful communication that can be applied throughout the hospital to potentially improve patient care, interdepartmental collaboration, and trainee and faculty quality of life.

Clinical leaders crossing boundaries: A study on the role of clinical leadership in crossing boundaries between specialties

BACKGROUND

Due to the growing number of complex (multimorbid) patients, integrating and coordinating care across medical specialties around patient needs is an urgent theme in current health care. Clinical leadership plays an important role in stimulating coordination both within and between specialty groups, which results in better outcomes in terms of job satisfaction and quality of care.

PURPOSE

In this light, this study aims to understand the relation between physicians' clinical leadership and outcomes, focusing on the sequential mediation of relationships and coordination with physicians within their own medical specialty group and from other specialties.

METHODOLOGY

A cross-sectional self-administered survey among physicians in a Dutch hospital (n = 107) was conducted to measure clinical leadership, relational coordination at two levels (medical specialty group and between different specialties), quality of care, and job satisfaction.

RESULTS

Clinical leadership was related to better quality of care through more relational coordination within the medical specialty group. Clinical leadership was related to more job satisfaction through more relational coordination within the medical specialty group, through more relational coordination between specialties, and sequentially through both kinds of relational coordination.

CONCLUSION

Physicians who act as clinical leaders are important for crossing specialist boundaries and increasing care outcomes.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

To improve multidisciplinary collaboration, managers should encourage clinical leadership and pay attention to the strong relationships between physicians from the same specialty.

"Friction by Definition": Conflict at Patient Handover Between Emergency and Internal Medicine Physicians at an Academic Medical Center

INTRODUCTION

Patient handoffs from emergency physicians (EP) to internal medicine (IM) physicians may be complicated by conflict with the potential for adverse outcomes. The objective of this study was to identify the specific types of, and contributors to, conflict between EPs and IM physicians in this context.

METHODS

We performed a qualitative focus group study using a constructivist grounded theory approach involving emergency medicine (EM) and IM residents and faculty at a large academic medical center. Focus groups assessed perspectives and experiences of EP/IM physician interactions related to patient handoffs. We interpreted data with the matrix analytic method.

RESULTS

From May to December 2019, 24 residents (IM = 11, EM = 13) and 11 faculty (IM = 6, EM = 5) from the two departments participated in eight focus groups and two interviews. Two key themes emerged: 1) disagreements about disposition (ie, whether a patient needed to be admitted, should go to an intensive care unit, or required additional testing before transfer to the floor); and 2) contextual factors (ie, the request to discuss an admission being a primer for conflict; lack of knowledge of the other person and their workflow; high clinical workload and volume; and different interdepartmental perspectives on the benefits of a rapid emergency department workflow).

CONCLUSIONS

Causes of conflict at patient handover between EPs and IM physicians are related primarily to disposition concerns and contextual factors. Using theoretical models of task, process, and relationship conflict, we suggest recommendations to improve the EM/IM interaction to potentially reduce conflict and advance patient care.