Suchergebnisse

This paper reviews research since 1970 on the relationship between accident liability and individual differences, focusing specifically on accidents at work. The history of research into accident liability and the methodological problems associated with the research are considered. The review goes on to examine work on the impact of personality factors, cognitive factors, and social factors on the likelihood of accident involvement at work. We suggest that research into individual differences in accident liability should consider two possible routes to accident involvement via errors and/or violations. Although errors are predominantly associated with cognitive factors, violations have their origins in social psychological factors. We also consider the role of stress in mediating the personality-accident association. It is contended that individuals differ in their reactions to stress, so that although some respond by an increase in risk-taking behavior, the effect on others is to increase the likelihood of suboptimal performance in terms of information processing. Actual or potential applications of this research include the development of a more sophisticated model of individual differences in accident liability, which should be useful to organizations attempting to promote safety.

"Positive deviance is an asset-based improvement approach. At its core is the belief that solutions to problems already exist within communities, and that identifying, understanding, and sharing these solutions enables improvements at scale. Originating in the field of international public health in the 1960s, positive deviance is now, with some adaptations, seeing growing application in healthcare. We present examples of how positive deviance has been used to support healthcare improvement. We draw on an emerging view of safety, known as Safety II, to explain why positive deviance has drawn the interest of researchers and improvers alike. In doing so, we identify a set of fundamental values associated with the positive deviance approach and consider how far they align with current use. Throughout, we consider the untapped potential of the approach, reflect on its limitations, and offer insights into the possible challenges of using it in practice"--

PurposeThe primary aim of this systematic review is to identify, describe and synthesise the published literature on the types and effects of feedback received by emergency ambulance staff. The secondary aim will be to describe the mechanisms and moderators of the effects of prehospital feedback in an organisational context.Design/methodology/approachThe application and effects of feedback for healthcare professionals, to support improved practice, is well researched within the wider healthcare domain. Within a prehospital context, research into feedback has been developing in specific areas such as automated feedback from defibrillators and debrief after simulation. However, to date there has been no systematic review published on the types and effects of feedback available to emergency ambulance staff.FindingsThis study will be a systematic mixed studies review including empirical primary research of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods methodology published in peer-reviewed journals in English. Studies will be included if they explore the concept of feedback as defined in this review, i.e. the systematised provision of information to emergency ambulance staff regarding their performance within prehospital practice and/or patient outcomes. The search strategy will consist of three facets: ambulance staff synonyms, feedback synonyms and feedback content. The databases to be searched from inception are MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and Web of Science. Study quality will be appraised using the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) developed by Hong et al. (2018). Data analysis will consist of narrative synthesis guided by Popay et al. (2006) following a parallel-results convergent synthesis design.Originality/valueRegistration: PROSPERO (CRD42020162600)

AbstractWorkplace incivility is a pervasive complex problem within health care. Incivility manifests as subtle disrespectful behaviours, which seem inconsequential. However, evidence demonstrates that incivility can be harmful to targets and witnesses through negative emotions, poorer mental health, reduced job satisfaction, diminished performance and compromised patient care. It is unclear to what extent existing research critically explores how ethnicity, culture and racism influence how hospital staff experience incivility. This global scoping review systematically analysed existing research exploring the specific ways incivility manifests and impacts racially minoritised hospital workers. Of 2636 academic and 101 grey literature articles, 32 were included. Incivility experiences were categorised into four themes: (1) Cultural control, (2) Rejection of work contributions, (3) Disempowerment at work and (4) Managerial indifference. The included articles highlighted detrimental consequences, such as negative emotions, silencing, withdrawal and reduced support‐seeking behaviours. Few studies presented evidence regarding the negative impacts of incivility on patient care. Racialisation and racial dynamics are a significant factor for hospital‐based incivility. Currently we do not know the extent to which racialised incivility is associated directly or, perhaps either via burnout or disengagement, indirectly with poorer care. This knowledge can inform the creation of comprehensive, evidence‐based interventions to address this important issue.

Logic models feature prominently in intervention research yet there is increasing debate about their ability to express how interventions work in the real-world. 'Real-world' logic models are a new proposition which express complex interventions in context. They are designed to help researchers strike a balance between context-sensitivity and scalability. This article explores the utility of real-world logic models in a trial involving a complex intervention called 'Your Care Needs You', designed to improve hospital-home transitions for UK older patients. The approach is found to usefully capture, refine and express important learning about intervention-implementation-context dynamics. The findings imply the need for intervention researchers to think creatively about how to implement interventions in diverse and sometimes challenging environments and to develop understanding of how complex interventions adapt on implementation to produce outcomes. The possibility of assessing the wider social and policy context within intervention research is also posed.