ArticleBMC medicine2023
Interventions to address unprofessional behaviours between staff in acute care: what works for whom and why? A realist review.
Article in BMC medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Developing a novel typology of unprofessional behaviours between healthcare staff: a best fit framework synthesis.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Systematically analyzing behavior change techniques used in 44 interventions to reduce unprofessional behavior between healthcare staff.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Drivers of unprofessional behaviour between staff in acute care hospitals: a realist review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Becoming Interprofessional: A Longitudinal Narrative Study of Professional and Interprofessional Identity Development Across Five Health Professions.Qualitative health research · 2026Article
- Methods of Engaging Interest-Holders in Healthcare Evidence Syntheses: A Scoping Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Developing and integrating physician assistants/associates in UK hospital teams: a realist review of lessons from international experiences.BMC medicine · 2025Review
- Allied health professionals' experiences of co-worker unprofessional behaviour and their reported speaking-up skills: A secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey.Future healthcare journal · 2025Article
- Axiological reflection for nursing ethics education: The missing link in understanding value conflicts.Nursing ethics · 2025Article
- How can interventions more directly address drivers of unprofessional behaviour between healthcare staff?BMJ open quality · 2024Review
- Evaluation of a culture change program to reduce unprofessional behaviours by hospital co-workers in Australian hospitals.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Review
- Co-worker unprofessional behaviour and patient safety risks: an analysis of co-worker reports across eight Australian hospitals.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2024Article
- The Antecedents of Horizontal Violence Among Nurses: A Qualitative Content Analysis Study.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnprofessional behaviour (UB) between staff encompasses various behaviours, including incivility, microaggressions, harassment, and bullying. UB is pervasive in acute healthcare settings and disproportionately impacts minoritised staff. UB has detrimental effects on staff wellbeing, patient safety and organisational resources. While interventions have been implemented to mitigate UB, there is limited understanding of how and why they may work and for whom.
methodsThis study utilised a realist review methodology with stakeholder input to improve understanding of these complex context-dependent interventions. Initial programme theories were formulated drawing upon scoping searches and reports known to the study team. Purposive systematic searches were conducted to gather grey and published global literature from databases. Documents were selected if relevant to UB in acute care settings while considering rigour and relevance. Data were extracted from these reports, synthesised, and initial theories tested, to produce refined programme theories.
resultsOf 2977 deduplicated records, 148 full text reports were included with 42 reports describing interventions to address UB in acute healthcare settings. Interventions drew on 13 types of behaviour change strategies and were categorised into five types of intervention (1) single session (i.e. one off); (2) multiple session; (3) single or multiple sessions combined with other actions (e.g. training sessions plus a code of conduct); (4) professional accountability and reporting programmes and; (5) structured culture change interventions. We formulated 55 context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain how, why, and when these interventions work. We identified twelve key dynamics to consider in intervention design, including importance of addressing systemic contributors, rebuilding trust in managers, and promoting a psychologically safe culture; fifteen implementation principles were identified to address these dynamics.
conclusionsInterventions to address UB are still at an early stage of development, and their effectiveness to reduce UB and improve patient safety is unclear. Future interventions should incorporate knowledge from behavioural and implementation science to affect behaviour change; draw on multiple concurrent strategies to address systemic contributors to UB; and consider the undue burden of UB on minoritised groups. 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 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.