3.8 Article

Empowering trainees to promote professionalism

Journal

CLINICAL TEACHER
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages 304-308

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tct.12680

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Unprofessional behaviour can interfere with patient care. Empowering trainees to address each other's unprofessional behaviour can help address a larger number of incidents that may not be witnessed by supervisors, as well as promote a culture of professionalism in a teaching programme. The goal of the study was to teach trainees to effectively address observed unprofessional behaviour and to assess the impact of this exercise on the percentage of cases directly addressed, reported or ignored 6-12months after the initial training. Methods: Eighty-four trainees participated in objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) cases designed to address a colleague's inappropriate behaviour. Baseline and follow-up surveys performed 6-12months after the OSCE were completed detailing the number of incidents witnessed in colleagues and the method employed to address those incidents: personally address (with level of satisfaction), report or ignore. Results: There was a significant increase in the number of unprofessional incidents identified after the OSCE (pre-OSCE, 1.12 per resident; post-OSCE, 1.69 per resident; t=2.27, p=0.029). Of the 72 incidents at baseline, 43percent were addressed directly and 43percent of those had a satisfactory resolution. Of the 71 incidents described 6-12months later, 61percent were addressed directly and 79percent of those had a satisfactory resolution. Trainees were more likely to address rather than to report unprofessional behaviour chi(2)(2,58)=13, p=0.001. Discussion: The intervention had a significant impact on the percentage of trainees that addressed any observed unprofessional behaviour, and the rate of satisfaction after doing so. It did not change the percentage of cases that were neither addressed nor reported.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available