Why is it so hard for doctors to speak up when they see an error occurring?
Claire Dendle A B , Andrea Paul A , Carmel Scott C , Elizabeth Gillespie C , Despina Kotsanas B and Rhonda L. Stuart A B C DA Department of Medicine, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia.
B Department Infectious Diseases, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Vic. 3168, Australia.
C Department Infection Control and Epidemiology, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Vic. 3168, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: Rhonda.stuart@southernhealth.org.au
Healthcare Infection 18(2) 72-75 https://doi.org/10.1071/HI12044
Submitted: 11 October 2012 Accepted: 11 December 2012 Published: 10 April 2013
Abstract
Background: The ability of doctors to ‘speak up’ when a medical error occurs is a cornerstone of patient safety. Hand hygiene (HH) is one of the simplest methods of reducing patient harm and represents a behavioural model in which to observe medical staff interaction. Our hypothesis is that the hierarchical structure amongst doctors prevents them from speaking up, which in turn contributes to poor HH compliance.
Methods: An anonymous survey was administered to doctors employed in a health service in Melbourne, Australia. Questions included: willingness to prompt doctors to perform HH, reasons for not speaking up, perceived reactions of a doctor being prompted to perform HH and perceived reaction if they were asked to perform HH.
Results: One hundred and sixty-three doctors completed the questionnaire. Willingness to prompt a doctor to perform HH decreased as the questioned doctor’s seniority increased, with 88.5% willing to ask an intern but only 40.4% willing to ask a consultant. The main reason for not asking a senior doctor was not wanting to speak up to a superior.
Conclusions: Our study highlights a steep medical hierarchy, with less than half of the doctors willing to question seniors, even when they noticed an error occurring. We suggest that if acquired, the skills needed to respectfully prompt HH are transferrable to many other patient safety initiatives.
References
[1] Pittet D, Hugonnet S, Harbarth S, Mourouga P, Suavan V, Touvenau S, et al Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene. Lancet 2000; 356 1307–12.| Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3crhsVSltQ%3D%3D&md5=9fac0ca583129bddfc58a724b31c0c18CAS | 11073019PubMed |
[2] Nuland S. The Doctors’ Plague: Germs, Childbed Fever and the Strange Story of Ignac Semmelweis. New York: WW Norton and Company, Inc.; 2003.
[3] Grayson ML, Russo PL, Cruickshank M, Bear JL, Gee CA, Hughes CF, et al Outcomes from the first 2 years of the Australian National Hand Hygiene Initiative. Med J Aust 2011; 195 615–9.
| Outcomes from the first 2 years of the Australian National Hand Hygiene Initiative.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22107015PubMed |
[4] Firth-Cozens JR, Firth A, Booth S. Attitudes to and experiences of reporting poor care. Clin Gov 2003; 8 331–6.
| Attitudes to and experiences of reporting poor care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[5] Faunce TA, Bolson SN. Three Australian whistleblowing sagas: lessons for internal and external regulation. Med J Aust 2004; 181 44–7.
| 15233613PubMed |
[6] Pittet D, Simon A, Hugonnet S, Pessoa-Silva CL, Sauvan V, Perneger TV. Hand hygiene among physicians: performance, beliefs, and perceptions. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141 1–8.
| 15238364PubMed |
[7] Jenner EA, Watson PWB, Miller L, Jones F, Scott GM. Explaining hand hygiene practice: an extended application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Psychol Health Med 2002; 7 311–72.
| Explaining hand hygiene practice: an extended application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[8] Pizzi L, Goldfarb NI, Nash DB. Chapter 44. Crew resource management and its applications in medicine. In: Making Health Care Safer: A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2001. Available from: https://www.premierinc.com/safety/topics/patient_safety/downloads/23_AHRQ_evidence_report_43.pdf [verified 26 March 2013].
[9] Helmreich RL. On error management: lessons from aviation. BMJ 2000; 320 781–5.
| On error management: lessons from aviation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7osFCgsw%3D%3D&md5=db7f111eb6848c6d7494f8bbd8f366c1CAS | 10720367PubMed |
[10] Berenholtz SM, Pronovost PJ, Lipsett PA, Hobson D, Earsing K, Farley JE, et al Eliminating catheter related bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2004; 32 2014–20.
| Eliminating catheter related bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15483409PubMed |
[11] Yap LB, Bowler ICJW, Maxwell PH. Guiding hands of our teachers. Lancet 2001; 357 480
| Guiding hands of our teachers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7nt12msA%3D%3D&md5=e6e7a6c096c522a60328a59f03304c66CAS | 11273099PubMed |
[12] Paul A, Sherif M. A medico-linguistic approach to clinical skills teaching. In: Teaching, Learning and Assessing Clinical Skills: Does One Size Fit All? 2nd International Clinical Skills Conference Abstract Book; 2007 July 1–4; Prato, Italy. p. 99.
[13] Pronovost PJ, Nolan T, Zeger S, Miller M, Rubin H. How can clinicians measure safety and quality in acute care? Lancet 2004; 363 1061–7.
| How can clinicians measure safety and quality in acute care?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15051287PubMed |
[14] McGregor J, Lee M, Slade D, Dunston R. Effective clinical handover communication: improving patient safety, experiences and outcomes. Pilot Report. Sydney: University of Technology; 2011.