Cargando…

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 improve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aunger, Justin Avery, Maben, Jill, Abrams, Ruth, Wright, Judy M., Mannion, Russell, Pearson, Mark, Jones, Aled, Westbrook, Johanna I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38037093
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10291-3
_version_ 1785152057875890176
author Aunger, Justin Avery
Maben, Jill
Abrams, Ruth
Wright, Judy M.
Mannion, Russell
Pearson, Mark
Jones, Aled
Westbrook, Johanna I.
author_facet Aunger, Justin Avery
Maben, Jill
Abrams, Ruth
Wright, Judy M.
Mannion, Russell
Pearson, Mark
Jones, Aled
Westbrook, Johanna I.
author_sort Aunger, Justin Avery
collection PubMed
description 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-10291-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10687856
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106878562023-11-30 Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review Aunger, Justin Avery Maben, Jill Abrams, Ruth Wright, Judy M. Mannion, Russell Pearson, Mark Jones, Aled Westbrook, Johanna I. BMC Health Serv Res Research 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-10291-3. BioMed Central 2023-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10687856/ /pubmed/38037093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10291-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Aunger, Justin Avery
Maben, Jill
Abrams, Ruth
Wright, Judy M.
Mannion, Russell
Pearson, Mark
Jones, Aled
Westbrook, Johanna I.
Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title_full Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title_fullStr Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title_full_unstemmed Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title_short Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
title_sort drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38037093
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10291-3
work_keys_str_mv AT aungerjustinavery driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT mabenjill driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT abramsruth driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT wrightjudym driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT mannionrussell driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT pearsonmark driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT jonesaled driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview
AT westbrookjohannai driversofunprofessionalbehaviourbetweenstaffinacutecarehospitalsarealistreview