Bad manners in the Emergency Department: Incivility among doctors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Negative workplace behaviour, especially negative communication is a recognised problem in many organisations and is known to have serious impact on workplace performance, productivity and personal wellbeing. Emergency Departments (ED) can be high stress environments in which communication and perceptions of respect between physicians and other staff may underlie individual functioning. We conducted a study to estimate the influence of incivility (ICV) among physicians in the ED. METHODS: We developed an online survey to assess workplace incivility in the ED. We focussed on frequency, origin, reasons and situations where ICV was reported. To measure the levels and the potential influence of ICV on psychological safety, social stress and personal wellbeing we correlated our questionnaire to standard psychological scales. Statistical analysis included Students t-test, chi squared distribution and Pearson correlation coefficient. RESULTS: We invited all seventy-seven ED physicians to participate in our survey. Among those that completed (n = 50, 65%) the survey, 9% of ED physicians reported frequent (1/week) and 38% occasional (1/month) incidents of ICV. 28% of physicians reported experiencing ICV once per quarter and 21% reported a frequency of only once per year, no physician reported ICV on a daily basis. Levels of ICV were significantly higher in interactions with specialists from outside then within the ED (p<0.01). ICV was perceived particularly during critical situations. Our findings showed a significant correlation between internal (within the ED team) ICV and psychological safety. To ED physicians internal ICV was associated with lower levels of psychological safety (p<0.01). ICV displayed from sources outside the ED team was not associated with psychological safety, but we found a significant influence of external ICV on personal irritability and reduced wellbeing (p<0.01). DISCUSSION: The incidence of incivility was high among the ED physicians. Although this was a small sample, the association between workplace ICV and psychological safety, personal irritation as well personal comfort suggests that ICV may be an important variable underlying ED team performance. These findings further underscore the need to foster a culture of respect and good communication between departments, as levels of ICV were highest with physicians from outside the ED. Future research would benefit from examining strategies to prevent and reduce ICV and identify reasons for personal variation in perception of ICV. During critical situations and in general collaboration with specialists, awareness of ICV and countermeasures are important to avoid decreased performance and negative impact on staff and patient.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».