Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30899908›Full record

ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2019

When Team Conflicts Threaten Quality of Care: A Study of Health Care Professionals' Experiences and Perceptions.

Stéphane Cullati, Naike Bochatay, Fabienne Maître, Thierry Laroche, Virginie Muller-Juge, Katherine S Blondon, Noëlle Junod Perron, Nadia M Bajwa, Nu Viet Vu, Sara Kim and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Lessons in leadership: Developing a longitudinal evidence-based teaching curriculum on professionalism in healthcare.Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Models of Care for Older People: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Stéphane CullatiQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Naike BochatayInstitute of Sociological Research, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Fabienne MaîtreDivision of General Internal Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Thierry LarocheDivision of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Virginie Muller-JugeUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Katherine S BlondonDivision of General Internal Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Noëlle Junod PerronUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Nadia M BajwaUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Nu Viet VuUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Sara KimDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle.
Georges L SavoldelliUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Patricia HudelsonDepartment of Community Medicine, Primary and Emergency Care, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Pierre ChopardQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.
Mathieu R NendazUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education, University of Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore professionals' experiences and perceptions of whether, how, and what types of conflicts affected the quality of patient care. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe conducted 82 semistructured interviews with randomly selected health care professionals in a Swiss teaching hospital (October 2014 and March 2016). Participants related stories of team conflicts (intra-/interprofessional, among protagonists at the same or different hierarchical levels) and the perceived consequences for patient care. We analyzed quality of care using the dimensions of care proposed by the Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care in America (safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity).

resultsSeventy-seven of 130 conflicts had no perceived consequences for patient care. Of the 53 conflicts (41%) with potential perceived consequences, the most common were care not provided in a timely manner to patients (delays, longer hospitalization), care not being patient-centered, and less efficient care. Intraprofessional conflicts were linked with less patient-centered care, whereas interprofessional conflicts were linked with less timely care. Conflicts among protagonists at the same hierarchical level were linked with less timely care and less patient-centered care. In some situations, perceived unsatisfactory quality of care generated team conflicts.

conclusionBased on participants' assessments, 4 of 10 conflict stories had potential consequences for the quality of patient care. The most common consequences were failure to provide timely, patient-centered, and efficient care. Management of hospitals should consider team conflicts as a potential threat to quality of care and support conflict management programs.

Identifiers

PMID30899908
PMCPMC6408685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.