The impact of vulnerability and exposure to pervasive interprofessional incivility among medical staff on wellbeing

IntroductionTraditional methods for modelling human interactions within organisational contexts are often hindered by the complexity inherent within these systems. Building on new approaches to information modelling in the social sciences and drawing on the work of scholars in transdisciplinary fields, we proposed that a reliable model of human interaction as well as its emergent properties can be demonstrated using theories related to emergent information.MethodsWe demonstrated these dynamics through a test case related to data from a prevalence survey of incivility among medical staff. For each survey respondent we defined their vulnerability profile based upon a combination of their biographical characteristics, such as age, gender, and length of employment within a hospital and the hospital type (private or public). We modelled the interactions between the composite vulnerability profile of staff against their reports of their exposure to incivility and the consequent negative impact on their wellbeing.ResultsWe found that vulnerability profile appeared to be proportionally related to the extent to which they were exposed to rudeness in the workplace and to a negative impact on subjective wellbeing.DiscussionThis model can potentially be used to tailor resources to improve the wellbeing of hospital medical staff at increased risk of facing incivility, bullying and harassment at their workplaces

Worn out: exploring the phenomenon of mental health wearable devices

Theoretical thesis.Includes bibliographical references.Introduction -- Literature review -- Chapter 1. Producing artefacts of emotion : the production and regulation of mental health wearable devices -- Chapter 2. Embodied emotion and mood engineering -- Chapter 3. I measure; therefore, I am : regulating the quantified self -- Conclusion -- References -- Appendix.“Worn out : Exploring the Phenomenon of Mental Health Wearable Devices” is a dissertation based on qualitative research that seeks to understand how the contemporary western understanding of mental well-being and mental ill health is forged through the use of technological interventions such as wearable devices. I attempt to untangle the complex interactions between researchers, device creators, devices, multi-national corporations, mental health practitioners and device users who inhabit a posthuman cyborg world where devices serve as prostheses for supposedly dysfunctional minds. I examine how users ascribe meaning to the physiological artefacts of emotion captured by wearable devices, to construct a sense of self, mediate a sense of control, agency and normativity based on their interaction with these devices. I also explore the influencing factors that drive the creation of algorithms that attempt to determine hitherto elusive objective baselines for states of being that were previously considered subjective and variable. Is the seeming reductionism of a range of meanings of the physiological signs of distress read by devices a cause for concern? Does the use of these devices prove therapeutic or are they being used as another means of socialization? These are the questions I seek to answer through the examination of the phenomenon of individual and corporate mental health wearable devices.Mode of access: World wide web1 online resource (unpaged

Hospital staff reports of coworker positive and unprofessional behaviours across eight hospitals: who reports what about whom?

Background Workplace behaviours of healthcare staff impact patient safety, staff well-being and organisational outcomes. A whole-of-hospital culture change programme, Ethos, was implemented by St. Vincent’s Health Australia across eight hospitals. Ethos includes a secure online submission system that allows staff across all professional groups to report positive (Feedback for Recognition) and negative (Feedback for Reflection) coworker behaviours. We analysed these submissions to determine patterns and rates of submissions and identify the coworker behaviours reported.Method All Ethos submissions between 2017 and 2020 were deidentified and analysed. Submissions include structured data elements (eg, professional role of the reporter and subjects, event and report dates) and a narrative account of the event and coworker behaviours. Descriptive statistics were calculated to assess use and reporting patterns. Coding of the content of submissions was performed to classify types of reported coworker behaviours.Results There were a total of 2504 Ethos submissions, including 1194 (47.7%) Recognition and 1310 (52.3%) Reflection submissions. Use of the submission tool was highest among nurses (20.14 submissions/100 nursing staff) and lowest among non-clinical services staff (5.07/100 non-clinical services staff). Nurses were most frequently the subject of Recognition submissions (7.56/100 nurses) while management and administrative staff were the least (4.25/100 staff). Frequently reported positive coworker behaviours were non-technical skills (79.3%, N=947); values-driven behaviours (72.5%, N=866); and actions that enhanced patient care (51.3%, N=612). Medical staff were the most frequent subjects of Reflection submissions (12.59/100 medical staff), and non-clinical services staff the least (4.53/100 staff). Overall, the most frequently reported unprofessional behaviours were being rude (53.8%, N=705); humiliating or ridiculing others (26%, N=346); and ignoring others’ opinions (24.6%, N=322).Conclusion Hospital staff across all professional groups used the Ethos messaging system to report both positive and negative coworker behaviours. High rates of Recognition submissions demonstrate a strong desire of staff to reward and encourage positive workplace behaviours, highlighting the importance of culture change programmes which emphasise these behaviours. The unprofessional behaviours identified in submissions are consistent with behaviours previously reported in surveys of hospital staff, suggesting that submissions are a reliable indicator of staff experiences