Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author
Vauk, Stefanie
dc.contributor.author
Seelandt, Julia C.
dc.contributor.author
Huber, Katja
dc.contributor.author
Grande, Bastian
dc.contributor.author
Kolbe, Michaela
dc.date.accessioned
2022-10-31T09:55:00Z
dc.date.available
2022-10-28T03:21:12Z
dc.date.available
2022-10-31T09:55:00Z
dc.date.issued
2022-11
dc.identifier.issn
0007-0912
dc.identifier.issn
1471-6771
dc.identifier.other
10.1016/j.bja.2022.07.050
en_US
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/578206
dc.description.abstract
Background: Speaking up with concerns is critical for patient safety. We studied whether witnessing a civil (i.e. polite, respectful) response to speaking up would increase the occurrence of further speaking up by hospital staff members as compared with witnessing a pseudo-civil (i.e. vague and slightly dismissive) or rude response. Methods: In this RCT in a single, large academic teaching hospital, a single simulated basic life support scenario was designed to elicit standardised opportunities to speak up. Participants in teams of two or three were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions in which the degree of civility in reacting to speaking up was manipulated by an embedded simulated person. Speaking up behaviour was assessed by behaviour coding of the video recordings of the team interactions by applying 10 codes using The Observer XT 14.1. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling. Results: The sample included 125 interprofessional hospital staff members (82 [66%] women, 43 [34%] men). Participants were more likely to speak up when they felt psychologically safe (γ=0.47; standard error [SE]=0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09–0.85; P=0.017). Participants were more likely to speak up in the rude condition than in the other conditions (γ=0.28; SE=0.12; 95% CI, 0.05–0.52; P=0.019). Across conditions, participants spoke up most frequently by structuring inquiry (n=289, 31.52%), proactive (n=240, 26.17%), and reactive (n=148, 16.14%) instruction statements, and gestures (n=139, 15.16%). Conclusion: Our study challenges current assumptions about the interplay of civility and speaking up behaviour in healthcare.
en_US
dc.language.iso
en
en_US
dc.publisher
Elsevier
en_US
dc.subject
assertiveness
en_US
dc.subject
civility
en_US
dc.subject
group processes
en_US
dc.subject
hospital
en_US
dc.subject
patient safety
en_US
dc.subject
simulation
en_US
dc.subject
speaking up
en_US
dc.subject
rudeness
en_US
dc.title
Exposure to incivility does not hinder speaking up: a randomised controlled high-fidelity simulation-based study
en_US
dc.type
Journal Article
dc.date.published
2022-09-06
ethz.journal.title
British Journal of Anaesthesia
ethz.journal.volume
129
en_US
ethz.journal.issue
5
en_US
ethz.journal.abbreviated
Br J Anaesth
ethz.pages.start
776
en_US
ethz.pages.end
787
en_US
ethz.identifier.wos
ethz.identifier.scopus
ethz.publication.place
Amsterdam
en_US
ethz.publication.status
published
en_US
ethz.date.deposited
2022-10-28T03:21:14Z
ethz.source
SCOPUS
ethz.eth
yes
en_US
ethz.availability
Metadata only
en_US
ethz.rosetta.installDate
2022-10-31T09:55:01Z
ethz.rosetta.lastUpdated
2023-02-07T07:24:44Z
ethz.rosetta.versionExported
true
ethz.COinS
ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.atitle=Exposure%20to%20incivility%20does%20not%20hinder%20speaking%20up:%20a%20randomised%20controlled%20high-fidelity%20simulation-based%20study&rft.jtitle=British%20Journal%20of%20Anaesthesia&rft.date=2022-11&rft.volume=129&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=776&rft.epage=787&rft.issn=0007-0912&1471-6771&rft.au=Vauk,%20Stefanie&Seelandt,%20Julia%20C.&Huber,%20Katja&Grande,%20Bastian&Kolbe,%20Michaela&rft.genre=article&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bja.2022.07.050&
 Search print copy at ETH Library

Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatOpen in viewer

There are no files associated with this item.

Publication type

Show simple item record