“我担心”:急诊医学住院医师直言行为的多站点评估

IF 0.6 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
N. Feldman, N. Volz, Tim Snow, Lillian Wong, S. Hock, David K. Barnes, S. Bentley
{"title":"“我担心”:急诊医学住院医师直言行为的多站点评估","authors":"N. Feldman, N. Volz, Tim Snow, Lillian Wong, S. Hock, David K. Barnes, S. Bentley","doi":"10.1177/25160435221123464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction According to the Institute of Medicine, 98,000 annual deaths are caused by preventable errors. Speaking up about patient safety or professionalism concerns when they arise allows medical staff to move from bystanders to active participants in the prevention of patient harm. This study assesses the current climate around speaking up for patient safety and unprofessional behavior by Emergency Medicine (EM) resident physicians and compares it to previously published data from other specialties. Methods A multi-site, descriptive, cross-sectional design was utilized based on previously published Speaking Up Climate Safety and Professionalism Scales. EM residents at 3 programs in the United States were surveyed, and their responses were compared to previously published responses from other specialties. Results 102 residents from 3 EM residency programs responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 54.3%. Responses on the survey fell close to the neutral response (3 on a 5-point Likert scale) on all measures, indicating opportunity for improvement. However, EM responses were significantly more favorable than responses from other specialties on several questions. Conclusion This assessment demonstrates room for improvement on speaking up behaviors among EM residents but also suggests that unique features of EM may contribute to a relatively more positive speaking up climate compared to other specialties, which may inform strategies to increase speaking up behaviors. For example, deliberate practice of situations requiring strong teamwork and strategies to reduce traditional hierarchies may help emulate the climate that tends to occur organically in EM.","PeriodicalId":73888,"journal":{"name":"Journal of patient safety and risk management","volume":"3 1","pages":"229 - 233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“I’m concerned”: A multi-site assessment of emergency medicine resident speaking up behaviors\",\"authors\":\"N. Feldman, N. Volz, Tim Snow, Lillian Wong, S. Hock, David K. Barnes, S. Bentley\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/25160435221123464\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction According to the Institute of Medicine, 98,000 annual deaths are caused by preventable errors. Speaking up about patient safety or professionalism concerns when they arise allows medical staff to move from bystanders to active participants in the prevention of patient harm. This study assesses the current climate around speaking up for patient safety and unprofessional behavior by Emergency Medicine (EM) resident physicians and compares it to previously published data from other specialties. Methods A multi-site, descriptive, cross-sectional design was utilized based on previously published Speaking Up Climate Safety and Professionalism Scales. EM residents at 3 programs in the United States were surveyed, and their responses were compared to previously published responses from other specialties. Results 102 residents from 3 EM residency programs responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 54.3%. Responses on the survey fell close to the neutral response (3 on a 5-point Likert scale) on all measures, indicating opportunity for improvement. However, EM responses were significantly more favorable than responses from other specialties on several questions. Conclusion This assessment demonstrates room for improvement on speaking up behaviors among EM residents but also suggests that unique features of EM may contribute to a relatively more positive speaking up climate compared to other specialties, which may inform strategies to increase speaking up behaviors. For example, deliberate practice of situations requiring strong teamwork and strategies to reduce traditional hierarchies may help emulate the climate that tends to occur organically in EM.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of patient safety and risk management\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"229 - 233\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of patient safety and risk management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/25160435221123464\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of patient safety and risk management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25160435221123464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

根据医学研究所的数据,每年有98,000人的死亡是由可预防的错误造成的。在出现患者安全或专业问题时直言不讳,可以让医务人员从旁观者转变为预防患者伤害的积极参与者。本研究评估了急诊医学(EM)住院医师为患者安全和不专业行为发声的当前氛围,并将其与之前发表的其他专业数据进行了比较。方法采用多地点、描述性、横断面设计,基于先前出版的“畅所欲言气候安全和专业精神量表”。我们对美国3个项目的急诊住院医师进行了调查,并将他们的回答与之前公布的其他专业的回答进行了比较。结果来自3个新兴市场住院医师项目的102名住院医师参与了调查,回复率为54.3%。调查结果显示,所有指标的得分都接近中性(李克特5分制为3分),表明有改善的机会。然而,在几个问题上,EM的回答明显比其他专业的回答更有利。这项评估表明,新兴市场居民的直言行为还有改进的空间,但也表明,与其他专业相比,新兴市场的独特特征可能有助于形成相对更积极的直言氛围,这可能会为增加直言行为的策略提供信息。例如,有意识地练习需要强大的团队合作和减少传统等级制度的策略的情况,可能有助于模仿新兴市场中有机出现的气候。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“I’m concerned”: A multi-site assessment of emergency medicine resident speaking up behaviors
Introduction According to the Institute of Medicine, 98,000 annual deaths are caused by preventable errors. Speaking up about patient safety or professionalism concerns when they arise allows medical staff to move from bystanders to active participants in the prevention of patient harm. This study assesses the current climate around speaking up for patient safety and unprofessional behavior by Emergency Medicine (EM) resident physicians and compares it to previously published data from other specialties. Methods A multi-site, descriptive, cross-sectional design was utilized based on previously published Speaking Up Climate Safety and Professionalism Scales. EM residents at 3 programs in the United States were surveyed, and their responses were compared to previously published responses from other specialties. Results 102 residents from 3 EM residency programs responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 54.3%. Responses on the survey fell close to the neutral response (3 on a 5-point Likert scale) on all measures, indicating opportunity for improvement. However, EM responses were significantly more favorable than responses from other specialties on several questions. Conclusion This assessment demonstrates room for improvement on speaking up behaviors among EM residents but also suggests that unique features of EM may contribute to a relatively more positive speaking up climate compared to other specialties, which may inform strategies to increase speaking up behaviors. For example, deliberate practice of situations requiring strong teamwork and strategies to reduce traditional hierarchies may help emulate the climate that tends to occur organically in EM.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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