Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38129359›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2024

Clinician responses to disruptive intraoperative behaviour: patterns and norms identified from a multinational survey.

Alexander Villafranca, Ian Fast, Michelle Turick, Eric Jacobsohn

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Alexander VillafrancaSchool of Health, Northwestern Polytechnic, K220, 10726 106 Ave., Grande Prairie, AB, T8V 4C4, Canada. avillafranca@nwpolytech.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8991-2043
Ian FastDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Michelle TurickSchool of Health, Northwestern Polytechnic, Grande Prairie, AB, Canada.
Eric JacobsohnDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDisruptive intraoperative behaviour can have detrimental consequences for clinicians, institutions, and patients. The way victims and witnesses respond to disruptive behaviour can ameliorate or exacerbate consequences. Nevertheless, previous research has neither described the responses of a multinational sample of clinicians nor developed tools to recognize and evaluate responses.

methodsAfter obtaining ethics committee approval, 23 perioperative organizations distributed a survey evaluating clinician responses to disruptive behaviour. We grouped responses into four response strategies: passive, assertive, manipulative, and malicious. Thereafter, we derived norms (i.e., percentile distributions) for each response strategy using empirical distribution functions. Latent profile analysis identified groups of clinicians balancing their use of the four response strategies differently (i.e., response pattern groups). We used Chi square tests to examine associations between response pattern groups and respondent demographics.

resultsWe analyzed 4,789 complete responses. In response to disruptive behaviour, 33.7% of clinicians altered medical care in ways that were unindicated, 54.6% avoided communication with team members, and 12.1% misled the offender. Profile analysis identified five response pattern groups: extreme passive-predominant (30.5% of clinicians), extreme assertive-predominant (20.5%), moderate passive-predominant (18.9%), moderate assertive-predominant (26.5%), and a disparate pattern (greater use of manipulative and malicious responses) (3.5%). Profession, sex, management responsibilities, and sexual orientation predicted the response pattern group (all, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: The responses of thousands of clinicians involved passivity, manipulativeness, or maliciousness. We present norms and a response pattern classification to help organizations evaluate responses, recognize response patterns, and provide tailored support to victims and witnesses.

Indexed as

Problem BehaviorCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleOperating RoomsSurveys and Questionnairesbullyingconflictincivilityprofessionalismteamwork

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.