Ethical issues in unprofessional behavior of residents who dispute dismissal: ten year analysis of case law in hospital-based specialties.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Judith Godschalx-Dekker, Sebastiaan Pronk, Gert Olthuis, Rankie Ten Hoopen, Walther van Mook
{"title":"Ethical issues in unprofessional behavior of residents who dispute dismissal: ten year analysis of case law in hospital-based specialties.","authors":"Judith Godschalx-Dekker, Sebastiaan Pronk, Gert Olthuis, Rankie Ten Hoopen, Walther van Mook","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01180-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Residents who do not internalize professional values may not be a good fit for their specialty and compromise the quality of their patient care. Research aimed at recognizing residents' shortcomings in professionalism may help to prevent future shortcomings towards patients. The aim of this study was to increase insight into residents' shortcomings in medical professionalism in light of professional values relevant within residency training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed all law cases from the Dutch national conciliation board from 2011 to 2020 on the unprofessional behaviors described.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the period investigated, 61 dismissed residents challenged their dismissal. In 39 of 61 cases (64%), the program director named unprofessional behavior(s) as (one of the) reasons for dismissal. The most prevalent deficit of residents deemed unprofessional was poor self-awareness (80%); less prevalent deficits were: shortness of engagement and dishonest and disrespectful behavior (31% or less).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We describe perceived unprofessional behavior in residency, which was not about exceptional or abominable behaviors. For the most part, these behaviors concerned the accumulation of remediation-resistant day-to-day underperformance, discrediting trust and professional reliability. This finding encourages dedicated longitudinal assessment of professionalism and fuels the ethical debate about required professional values in hospital care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11823240/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01180-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Residents who do not internalize professional values may not be a good fit for their specialty and compromise the quality of their patient care. Research aimed at recognizing residents' shortcomings in professionalism may help to prevent future shortcomings towards patients. The aim of this study was to increase insight into residents' shortcomings in medical professionalism in light of professional values relevant within residency training.

Methods: We analyzed all law cases from the Dutch national conciliation board from 2011 to 2020 on the unprofessional behaviors described.

Results: During the period investigated, 61 dismissed residents challenged their dismissal. In 39 of 61 cases (64%), the program director named unprofessional behavior(s) as (one of the) reasons for dismissal. The most prevalent deficit of residents deemed unprofessional was poor self-awareness (80%); less prevalent deficits were: shortness of engagement and dishonest and disrespectful behavior (31% or less).

Conclusions: We describe perceived unprofessional behavior in residency, which was not about exceptional or abominable behaviors. For the most part, these behaviors concerned the accumulation of remediation-resistant day-to-day underperformance, discrediting trust and professional reliability. This finding encourages dedicated longitudinal assessment of professionalism and fuels the ethical debate about required professional values in hospital care.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信