Search

Background: Unprofessional behaviour among hospital staff is common. Such behaviour negatively impacts on staff wellbeing and patient outcomes. Professional accountability programs collect information about unprofessional staff behaviour from colleagues or patients, providing this as informal feedback to raise awareness, promote reflection, and change behaviour. Despite increased adoption, studies have not assessed the implementation of these programs utilising implementation theory. This study aims to (1) identify factors influencing the implementation of a whole-of-hospital professional accountability and culture change program, Ethos, implemented in eight hospitals within a large healthcare provider group, and (2) examine whether expert recommended implementation strategies were intuitively used during implementation, and the degree to which they were operationalised to address identified barriers. Method: Data relating to implementation of Ethos from organisational documents, interviews with senior and middle management, and surveys of hospital staff and peer messengers were obtained and coded in NVivo using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation strategies to address identified barriers were generated using Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategies and used in a second round of targeted coding, then assessed for degree of alignment to contextual barriers. Results: Four enablers, seven barriers, and three mixed factors were found, including perceived limitations in the confidential nature of the online messaging tool ('Design quality and packaging'), which had downstream challenges for the capacity to provide feedback about utilisation of Ethos ('Goals and Feedback', 'Access to Knowledge and Information'). Fourteen recommended implementation strategies were used, however, only four of these were operationalised to completely address contextual barriers. Conclusion: Aspects of the inner setting (e.g., 'Leadership Engagement', 'Tension for Change') had the greatest influence on implementation and should be considered prior to the implementation of future professional accountability programs. Theory can improve understanding of factors affecting implementation, and support strategies to address them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify individual and organisational factors associated with the prevalence, type and impact of unprofessional behaviours among hospital employees. Design, setting, participants: Staff in seven metropolitan tertiary hospitals operated by one health care provider in three states were surveyed (Dec 2017 – Nov 2018) about their experience of unprofessional behaviours — 21 classified as incivility or bullying and five as extreme unprofessional behaviour (eg, sexual or physical assault) — and their perceived impact on personal wellbeing, teamwork and care quality, as well as about their speaking‐up skills. Main outcome measures: Frequency of experiencing 26 unprofessional behaviours during the preceding 12 months; factors associated with experiencing unprofessional behaviour and its impact, including self‐reported speaking‐up skills. Results: Valid surveys (more than 60% of questions answered) were submitted by 5178 of an estimated 15 213 staff members (response rate, 34.0%). 4846 respondents (93.6%; 95% CI, 92.9–94.2%) reported experiencing at least one unprofessional behaviour during the preceding year, including 2009 (38.8%; 95% CI, 37.5–40.1%) who reported weekly or more frequent incivility or bullying; 753 (14.5%; 95% CI, 13.6–15.5%) reported extreme unprofessional behaviour. Nurses and non‐clinical staff members aged 25–34 years reported incivility/bullying and extreme behaviour more often than other staff and age groups respectively. Staff with self‐reported speaking‐up skills experienced less incivility/bullying (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.46–0.61) and extreme behaviour (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67–0.97), and also less frequently an impact on their personal wellbeing (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.38–0.51). Conclusions: Unprofessional behaviour is common among hospital workers. Tolerance for low level poor behaviour may be an enabler for more serious misbehaviour that endangers staff wellbeing and patient safety. Training staff about speaking up is required, together with organisational processes for effectively eliminating unprofessional behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine the proportion of care provided to children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in Australia consistent with clinical practice guidelines. Methods: Indicators were developed from national and international clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations and validated by an expert panel. Medical records from children ≤15 years presenting with AGE in three healthcare settings–Emergency Department (ED), hospital admissions and General Practitioner (GP) consultations–from randomly selected health districts across three Australian States were reviewed. Records were audited against 35 indicators by trained paediatric nurses, to determine adherence to CPGs during diagnosis, treatment, and ongoing management. Results: A total of 14,434 indicator assessments were performed from 854 healthcare visits for AGE by 669 children, across 75 GPs, 34 EDs and 26 hospital inpatient services. Documented adherence to guidelines across all healthcare settings was 45.5% for indicators relating to diagnosis (95% CI: 40.7–50.4), 96.1% for treatment (95% CI: 94.8–97.1) and 57.6% for ongoing management (95% CI: 51.3–63.7). Adherence varied by healthcare setting, with adherence in GPs (54.6%; 95% CI: 51.1–58.1) lower than for either ED settings (84.7%; 95% CI: 82.4–86.9) or for inpatients (84.3%; 95% CI: 80.0–87.9); p<0.0001 for both differences. The difference between settings was driven by differences in the diagnosis and ongoing management phases of care. Conclusions: Adherence to clinical guidelines for children presenting to healthcare providers with AGE varies according to phase of care and healthcare setting. Although appropriate diagnostic assessment and ongoing management phase procedures are not well documented in medical records (particularly in the GP setting), in the treatment phase children are treated in accordance with guidelines over 90% of the time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]