How can interventions more directly address drivers of unprofessional behaviour between healthcare staff?

Unprofessional behaviours (UBs) between healthcare staff are widespread and have negative impacts on patient safety, staff well-being and organisational efficiency. However, knowledge of how to address UBs is lacking. Our recent realist review analysed 148 sources including 42 reports of interventions drawing on different behaviour change strategies and found that interventions insufficiently explain their rationale for using particular strategies. We also explored the drivers of UBs and how these may interact. In our analysis, we elucidated both common mechanisms underlying both how drivers increase UB and how strategies address UB, enabling the mapping of strategies against drivers they address. For example, social norm-setting strategies work by fostering a more professional social norm, which can help tackle the driver 'reduced social cohesion'. Our novel programme theory, presented here, provides an increased understanding of what strategies might be effective to adddress specific drivers of UB. This can inform logic model design for those seeking to develop interventions addressing UB in healthcare settings.

Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review

BACKGROUND

Unprofessional behaviours (UB) between healthcare staff are rife in global healthcare systems, negatively impacting staff wellbeing, patient safety and care quality. Drivers of UBs include organisational, situational, team, and leadership issues which interact in complex ways. An improved understanding of these factors and their interactions would enable future interventions to better target these drivers of UB.

METHODS

A realist review following RAMESES guidelines was undertaken with stakeholder input. Initial theories were formulated drawing on reports known to the study team and scoping searches. A systematic search of databases including Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE and HMIC was performed to identify literature for theory refinement. Data were extracted from these reports, synthesised, and initial theories tested, to produce refined programme theories.

RESULTS

We included 81 reports (papers) from 2,977 deduplicated records of grey and academic reports, and 28 via Google, stakeholders, and team members, yielding a total of 109 reports. Five categories of contributor were formulated: (1) workplace disempowerment; (2) harmful workplace processes and cultures; (3) inhibited social cohesion; (4) reduced ability to speak up; and (5) lack of manager awareness and urgency. These resulted in direct increases to UB, reduced ability of staff to cope, and reduced ability to report, challenge or address UB. Twenty-three theories were developed to explain how these contributors work and interact, and how their outcomes differ across diverse staff groups. Staff most at risk of UB include women, new staff, staff with disabilities, and staff from minoritised groups. UB negatively impacted patient safety by impairing concentration, communication, ability to learn, confidence, and interpersonal trust.

CONCLUSION

Existing research has focused primarily on individual characteristics, but these are inconsistent, difficult to address, and can be used to deflect organisational responsibility. We present a comprehensive programme theory furthering understanding of contributors to UB, how they work and why, how they interact, whom they affect, and how patient safety is impacted. More research is needed to understand how and why minoritised staff are disproportionately affected by UB.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study was registered on the international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care (PROSPERO): https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021255490 .

Interventions to address unprofessional behaviours between staff in acute care: what works for whom and why? A realist review

BACKGROUND

Unprofessional behaviour (UB) between staff encompasses various behaviours, including incivility, microaggressions, harassment, and bullying. UB is pervasive in acute healthcare settings and disproportionately impacts minoritised staff. UB has detrimental effects on staff wellbeing, patient safety and organisational resources. While interventions have been implemented to mitigate UB, there is limited understanding of how and why they may work and for whom.

METHODS

This study utilised a realist review methodology with stakeholder input to improve understanding of these complex context-dependent interventions. Initial programme theories were formulated drawing upon scoping searches and reports known to the study team. Purposive systematic searches were conducted to gather grey and published global literature from databases. Documents were selected if relevant to UB in acute care settings while considering rigour and relevance. Data were extracted from these reports, synthesised, and initial theories tested, to produce refined programme theories.

RESULTS

Of 2977 deduplicated records, 148 full text reports were included with 42 reports describing interventions to address UB in acute healthcare settings. Interventions drew on 13 types of behaviour change strategies and were categorised into five types of intervention (1) single session (i.e. one off); (2) multiple session; (3) single or multiple sessions combined with other actions (e.g. training sessions plus a code of conduct); (4) professional accountability and reporting programmes and; (5) structured culture change interventions. We formulated 55 context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain how, why, and when these interventions work. We identified twelve key dynamics to consider in intervention design, including importance of addressing systemic contributors, rebuilding trust in managers, and promoting a psychologically safe culture; fifteen implementation principles were identified to address these dynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to address UB are still at an early stage of development, and their effectiveness to reduce UB and improve patient safety is unclear. Future interventions should incorporate knowledge from behavioural and implementation science to affect behaviour change; draw on multiple concurrent strategies to address systemic contributors to UB; and consider the undue burden of UB on minoritised groups.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study was registered on the international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care (PROSPERO): https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021255490 .

Promoting Civility in the Workplace: Addressing Bullying in New Graduate Nurses Using Simulation and Cognitive Rehearsal

This evidence-based practice project implementation aimed to enhance new graduate nurses' abilities to address workplace bullying. A mixed educational methodology was used. Participants indicated applying learned behaviors to improve communication, peer relationships, teamwork, and patient safety and to address bullying. Civility ratings did not significantly increase from before to after the intervention, presumably because of high baseline ratings. Future research should identify sensitive and specific measures to detect bullying behavior changes.

The impact of interprofessional incivility on medical performance, service and patient care: a systematic review

The stressful nature of the medical profession is a known trigger for aggression or abuse among healthcare staff. Interprofessional incivility, defined as low-intensity negative interactions with ambiguous or unclear intent to harm, has recently become an occupational concern in healthcare. While incivility in nursing has been widely investigated, its prevalence among physicians and its impact on patient care are poorly understood. This review summarises current understanding of the effects of interprofessional incivility on medical performance, service and patient care. A structured search and screening of literature returned 13 studies of diverse origin, methodology, quality, size and population type. The consensus is that interprofessional incivility is common among physicians and nurses and has both psychological and clinical outcomes, resulting in stress, compromised patient safety and poor quality of care. Junior staff are affected more often than consultants, with higher rates in radiology, general surgery, neurosurgery and cardiology. Incivility also undermines medical team performance, particularly in perioperative settings. In patient care, incivility is associated with complications, medical errors, mortality, and compromised patient safety and quality of care. Patients whose surgeons have a record of incivility can be at higher risk of complications. The impact of incivility on medical performance, service and patient care appears systemic and must be addressed accordingly. This analysis was limited by the methodological weaknesses of the included studies, which highlights the need for more high-quality empirical research. This would benefit the NHS and other stakeholders when designing targeted interventions. In particular, establishing quantitative methods for identifying and measuring incivility will be crucial for improving our understanding of the phenomenon.

Types of Nursing Intervention to Reduce Impact of Bullying and Aggression on Nurses in the Workplace

The bullying of nurses in the workplace hurts the individuals and the work environment. Bullying can cause mental health problems, reduces the quality of nursing services, and reduces patient safety. The purpose of this study was to describe types of nursing interventions to reduce impact of bullying on nurses in the workplace. This study used the scoping review method to examine literature from the CINAHL, PubMed, and ProQuest databases. The keywords used in English are “bullying OR cyberbullying” AND “nurse” AND “workplace OR work-place” AND “nursing care OR nursing intervention”. The inclusion criteria were full text, randomized control trial or quasi-experiment design, English language, population of nurses, and the publication period of the last 10 years (2013–2022). We found nine articles that discussed nursing interventions designed to reduce the impact of bullying on nurses in the workplace. The sample in the study was in the range of 26–97 respondents. Most of the articles in this review used the quasi-experiment method. The study showed that nursing interventions to heal had negative effects on the bullying on nurses. There are three types of interventions employed to reduce the impact of bullying and aggression on nurses in the workplace, namely training programs, cognitive rehearsal programs, and education programs.

An Innovative Civility Intervention Created by a Faculty and Student Action Research Team

BACKGROUND

Incivility is a significant issue in nursing education and practice, contributing to ineffective learning, unprofessional nursing practice, and negative patient outcomes.

METHOD

A team of nursing faculty and students used Action Research to develop a quality improvement project targeting civility. A two-part, evidence-based training was offered to prelicensure nursing students, faculty, and staff. Part one was designed to increase incivility awareness, and part two was intended to enhance communication skills.

RESULTS

Program evaluation data were collected through an anonymous survey and analyzed descriptively for themes. Results indicated students, faculty, and staff perceived the educational innovation as valuable and useful.

CONCLUSION

By using free resources, a college of nursing was able to implement a cost-effective program to begin a conversation and offer a communication strategy to address incivility for students, faculty, and staff. This program design can be adopted by others for use in their organization. [J Nurs Educ. 2020;59(4):214-217.].

An educational intervention to promote civility in nursing: a pilot study

Objectives Nursing students are ill equipped to handle uncivil situations in the workplace. The purpose of this project was to determine if providing students with education about identifying and addressing incivility would alter how students perceived their ability to recognize and address uncivil situations when encountered. Methods This pre-post-test comparative pilot study used the Generalized Self Efficacy Scale along with The Confidence Scale to measure student self-efficacy and confidence before and after the receipt of educational interventions on recognizing and addressing uncivil behaviors. Results The statistical analysis reveals an increase in both self-efficacy and confidence scores in recognizing and addressing uncivil behaviors following the educational interventions (p=0.000, p<0.001, respectively). Conclusions Educating pre-licensure nursing students about incivility increases self-efficacy and confidence levels in pre-licensure nursing students to recognize and address uncivil behaviors when encountered.

ANAMT Technical Guideline (DT 07): epidemiological mapping and preventive interventions against workplace violence

Workplace violence has potentially high prevalence, in addition to positive correlation with risk of physical and mental disorders, absenteeism, high turnover rates, impaired productivity and poorer organizational climate. Workplace violence is embedded in the work routine, while its manifestations are heterogeneous and vary according to the local culture, work activities and organization. The scientific evidence for the efficacy of interventions to reduce the prevalence of violent incidents is insufficient to ground general recommendations applicable to any occupational activity. Consensus among organizational actors about notions, relevance, prevalence and risk factors associated with workplace violence, based on epidemiological mappings, is necessary, given the subjective and cultural nature of this problem, and also to enable organizational actors to jointly design pilot solutions. This approach is based on methods used in experimental studies and seeks to promote greater adherence to changes.

Interventions addressing student bullying in the clinical workplace: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Student bullying in the clinical environment continues to have a substantial impact, despite numerous attempts to rectify the situation. However, there are significant gaps in the literature about interventions to help students, particularly a lack of specific guidance around which to formulate an intervention program likely to be effective. With this narrative review about student bullying interventions in the clinical learning environment, we examine and draw together the available, but patchy, information about 'what works' to inform better practice and further research.

METHODS

We initially followed a PICO approach to obtain and analyse data from 38 articles from seven databases. We then used a general inductive approach to form themes about effective student bullying intervention practice, and potential unintended consequences of some of these, which we further developed into six final themes.

RESULTS

The diverse literature presents difficulties in comparison of intervention efficacy and substantive guidance is sparse and inconsistently reported. The final analytical approach we employed was challenging but useful because it enabled us to reveal the more effective elements of bullying interventions, as well as information about what to avoid: an interventionist and institution need to, together, 1. understand bullying catalysts, 2. address staff needs, 3. have, but not rely on policy or reporting process about behaviour, 4. avoid targeting specific staff groups, but aim for saturation, 5. frame the intervention to encourage good behaviour, not target poor behaviour, and 6. possess specific knowledge and specialised teaching and facilitation skills. We present the themed evidence pragmatically to help practitioners and institutions design an effective program and avoid instigating practices which have now been found to be ineffective or deleterious.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite challenges with the complexity of the literature and in determining a useful approach for analysis and reporting, results are important and ideas about practice useful. These inform a way forward for further, more effective student bullying intervention and research: an active learning approach addressing staff needs, which is non-targeted and positively and skilfully administered. (331w).

On the line: Confronting isolation and bullying in the workplace

This article defines the terms associated with bullying, identifies two types of bullying behaviors, and discusses anti-bullying strategies based on education and professional behaviors to eliminate incivility in nursing departments.

Management of Nursing Workplace Incivility in the Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Workplace incivility is a well-documented issue in nursing in the health care setting. It has the potential to cause emotional and physical distress in victims and potentially affects the quality of care provided. The purpose of this study was to critique and summarize the most recent, available evidence related to interventions in assisting nursing staff working in health care settings in managing incivility. This systematic review of literature yielded 10 studies meeting the criteria. The studies were mostly identified as lower quality research. Despite the lower quality of research, the collection of evidence suggests the use of a combination of educational training about workplace incivility, training about effective responses to uncivil workplace behaviors, and active learning activities to practice newly learned communication skills, in assisting nurses in improving their ability to manage incivility in the workplace.

Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace

BACKGROUND

Bullying has been identified as one of the leading workplace stressors, with adverse consequences for the individual employee, groups of employees, and whole organisations. Employees who have been bullied have lower levels of job satisfaction, higher levels of anxiety and depression, and are more likely to leave their place of work. Organisations face increased risk of skill depletion and absenteeism, leading to loss of profit, potential legal fees, and tribunal cases. It is unclear to what extent these risks can be addressed through interventions to prevent bullying.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the effectiveness of workplace interventions to prevent bullying in the workplace.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched: the Cochrane Work Group Trials Register (August 2014); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2016, issue 1); PUBMED (1946 to January 2016); EMBASE (1980 to January 2016); PsycINFO (1967 to January 2016); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Plus; 1937 to January 2016); International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS; 1951 to January 2016); Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA; 1987 to January 2016); ABI Global (earliest record to January 2016); Business Source Premier (BSP; earliest record to January 2016); OpenGrey (previously known as OpenSIGLE-System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe; 1980 to December 2014); and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and cluster-randomised controlled trials of employee-directed interventions, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time-series studies of interventions of any type, aimed at preventing bullying in the workplace, targeted at an individual employee, a group of employees, or an organisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently screened and selected studies. We extracted data from included studies on victimisation, perpetration, and absenteeism associated with workplace bullying. We contacted study authors to gather additional data. We used the internal validity items from the Downs and Black quality assessment tool to evaluate included studies' risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies met the inclusion criteria. They had altogether 4116 participants. They were underpinned by theory and measured behaviour change in relation to bullying and related absenteeism. The included studies measured the effectiveness of interventions on the number of cases of self-reported bullying either as perpetrator or victim or both. Some studies referred to bullying using common synonyms such as mobbing and incivility and antonyms such as civility. Organisational/employer level interventionsTwo studies with 2969 participants found that the Civility, Respect, and Engagement in the Workforce (CREW) intervention produced a small increase in civility that translates to a 5% increase from baseline to follow-up, measured at 6 to 12 months (mean difference (MD) 0.17; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.28).One of the two studies reported that the CREW intervention produced a small decrease in supervisor incivility victimisation (MD -0.17; 95% CI -0.33 to -0.01) but not in co-worker incivility victimisation (MD -0.08; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.08) or in self-reported incivility perpetration (MD -0.05 95% CI -0.15 to 0.05). The study did find a decrease in the number of days absent during the previous month (MD -0.63; 95% CI -0.92 to -0.34) at 6-month follow-up. Individual/job interface level interventionsOne controlled before-after study with 49 participants compared expressive writing with a control writing exercise at two weeks follow-up. Participants in the intervention arm scored significantly lower on bullying measured as incivility perpetration (MD -3.52; 95% CI -6.24 to -0.80). There was no difference in bullying measured as incivility victimisation (MD -3.30 95% CI -6.89 to 0.29).One controlled before-after study with 60 employees who had learning disabilities compared a cognitive-behavioural intervention with no intervention. There was no significant difference in bullying victimisation after the intervention (risk ratio (RR) 0.55; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.25), or at the three-month follow-up (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.15), nor was there a significant difference in bullying perpetration following the intervention (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.54), or at the three-month follow-up (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.81). Multilevel InterventionsA five-site cluster-RCT with 1041 participants compared the effectiveness of combinations of policy communication, stress management training, and negative behaviours awareness training. The authors reported that bullying victimisation did not change (13.6% before intervention and 14.3% following intervention). The authors reported insufficient data for us to conduct our own analysis.Due to high risk of bias and imprecision, we graded the evidence for all outcomes as very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low quality evidence that organisational and individual interventions may prevent bullying behaviours in the workplace. We need large well-designed controlled trials of bullying prevention interventions operating on the levels of society/policy, organisation/employer, job/task and individual/job interface. Future studies should employ validated and reliable outcome measures of bullying and a minimum of 6 months follow-up.