Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38515008›Full record

SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2025

The prevalence of incivility in hospitals and the effects of incivility on patient safety culture and outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Benjamin Freedman, Wendy Wen Li, Zhanming Liang, Peter Hartin, Narelle Biedermann

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Tracking Workplace Violence over 20 Years.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

5 authors.

Benjamin FreedmanJames Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7635-8787
Wendy Wen LiJames Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0056-6130
Zhanming LiangJames Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8022-4017
Peter HartinJames Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2246-8352
Narelle BiedermannJames Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8344-5069

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimWorkplace incivility is a barrier to safe and high-quality patient care in nursing workplaces and more broadly in tertiary hospitals. The present study aims to systematically review the existing evidence to provide a comprehensive understanding of the prevalence of co-worker incivility experienced and witnessed by nurses and other healthcare professionals, the effects of incivility on patient safety culture (PSC) and patient outcomes, and the factors which mediate the relationship between incivility and patient safety.

methodsA systematic review with narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was undertaken to synthesize the data from 41 studies. DATA SOURCES: Databases searched included MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsycInfo, ProQuest, Emcare and Embase. Searches were conducted on 17 August 2021 and repeated on 15 March 2023.

resultsThe pooled prevalence of experienced incivility was 25.0%. The pooled prevalence of witnessed incivility was 30.1%. Workplace incivility was negatively associated with the PSC domains of teamwork, reporting patient safety events, organization learning/improvement, management support for safety, leadership, communication openness and communication about error. The composite pooled effect size of incivility on these domains of PSC was OR = 0.590, 95% CI [0.515, 0.676]. Workplace incivility was associated with a range of patient safety outcomes (PSOs) including near misses, adverse events, reduced procedural and diagnostic performance, medical error and mortality. State depletion, profession, psychological responses to incivility, information sharing, help seeking, workload and satisfaction with organizational communication were found to mediate the relationship between incivility and patient safety.

conclusionExperienced and witnessed incivility is prevalent in tertiary hospitals and has a deleterious effect on PSC and PSOs. A better understanding of the mechanisms of this relationship will support the development of interventions aimed at reducing both incivility and patient harm. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE IMPACT: This study quantifies the effect of incivility on PSC and outcomes. It provides support that interventions focusing on incivility are a valuable mechanism for improving patient care. It guides intervention design by highlighting which domains of PSC are most associated with incivility. It explores the profession-specific experiences of workplace incivility. REPORTING

methodThis report adheres to PRISMA reporting guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. The focus of this study is the nursing and healthcare workforce, therefore, patient or public involvement not required.

Indexed as

IncivilityNursing Staff, HospitalOrganizational CulturePatient SafetyWorkplaceAdultFemaleHumansMalePrevalenceadverse eventsdisruptive behaviourincivilitypatient safety culturepatient safety outcomesquality of care

Identifiers

PMID38515008
PMCPMC12371790

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.