Professionalism: A necessary ingredient in a culture of safety

Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science, The Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA.
Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety / Joint Commission Resources 10/2011; 37(10):447-55.
Source: PubMed


A safety culture requires the highest levels of professionalism. A Code of Professionalism was created in an obstetrics service line as a mechanism to address unprofessional behavior. In this initiative, a multidisciplinary Code of Professionalism was established, with the support of leadership and the employee and nursing unions, to help create a safety culture.
In 2005 the Code of Professionalism was introduced to physicians, nurses, and support staff. The U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety Culture Survey was used, along with a portion of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) Survey on Workplace Intimidation to measure changes in the safety culture. Data were collected in 2005, 2008, and 2011.
One hundred thirty-four reports were made to the committee on professionalism between February 2005 and December 2010. Some 96 (72%) of the reports were submitted by nurses, with physicians accounting for 13%. Seventy-five of the reports (56%) were about unprofessional behavior by physicians and 46 (34%) were about unprofessional nursing behavior. On the AHRQ Patient Safety Culture Survey, statistically significant improvement was shown in the Teamwork Within Units dimension, from 2005 to 2008; the Management Support dimension, from 2005 to 2008; the Organizational Learning dimension, from 2005 to 2008 and also from 2008 to 2011; and the Frequency of Events Reported dimension, from 2008 to 2011.
Implementing a multidisciplinary Code of Professionalism can improve the safety culture in a hospital. When leadership sets clear standards and holds physicians and staff to the same standard, improvements in an organization's safety culture can serve as the foundation for the delivery of safer care.

18 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Disruptive (“non-teamwork-promoting”) behavior by medical professionals undermines healthcare quality and a culture of safety, decreases staff morale, increases healthcare expense and increases litigation risk. Despite these untoward outcomes, disruptive behavior, defined as any performance that impacts the team's ability to achieve intended outcomes, often goes unacknowledged and unaddressed. Aggressive outbursts and other unprofessional behaviors frequently arise in high stress arenas, such as operating rooms, medical–surgical units, and intensive care units. Passive–aggressive and passive actions also interfere with individual performance, team cohesion, and system reliability. Given these observations, it's no surprise that pediatric cardio-thoracic surgeons, cardiologists, and their leaders – in fact all healthcare professionals – must sometimes deal with issues of personal behavior that impair healthcare team performance, cross-discipline relationships, and patient safety.This article begins with a problematic clinical event, then identifies key concepts for dealing effectively with colleagues whose behavior is not consistent with professional standards, group policies or practices. Five principles, reinforced by several action oriented tips and practical tools, are offered as guides to promoting professionalism and professional accountability in support of quality team-oriented care, patient safety and, if necessary, legal defense if disruptive colleagues challenge disciplinary interventions. The principles and tips revolve around issues of justice, assembling data that permit reasonable certainty that action is appropriate, minimizing or eliminating conflicts of interest between reviewers and those reviewed, aiming to help those whose performance is reviewed achieve insight about their disruptive behavior's impacts, and, ultimately, restoration to the norms of professional practice. Readers are challenged to consider how to increase the reliability of their processes; maximize colleagues' opportunities for receiving performance- and professionalism-related feedback; serve patients, families, and colleagues well; and reduce concomitant litigation risk.
    Progress in Pediatric Cardiology 01/2012; 33(1):37–45. DOI:10.1016/j.ppedcard.2011.12.007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although concern for patient safety is inherent to the practice of the health care professions, its transformation into a specific body of knowledge is relatively recent and thus patient safety may be considered as a comparatively 'new' discipline. Its main objectives are to avoid the occurrence of preventable adverse events (accidents, errors and complications) associated with health care and to limit the impact of inevitable adverse events. Despite these simple definitions, patient safety is multifaceted, quite complex in nature and includes many key elements. Thus, it cannot be simply defined as the provision of safe health care or the protection of patients from harm by health care providers because there are economic, fiscal, social, cultural and organisational aspects of a patient safety climate. It is essential for all health care practitioners and health care organisations to become more familiar with the general context of patient safety, to actively participate in efforts to implement patient safety measures in daily practice and to establish a patient safety culture.
    International Dental Journal 08/2012; 62(4):189-96. DOI:10.1111/j.1875-595X.2012.00119.x · 1.26 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose The study was undertaken to identify factors affecting perception of the importance and practice of patient safety management (PSM) among hospital employees in Korea. Methods This study was conducted using a descriptive design and a self-report questionnaire. Two hundred and eighty employees were recruited from three hospitals using a convenience sampling method. Measures were perception of the importance, practice, and characteristics of PSM. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics including t test, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson's correlation analysis, and multiple regression. Results Factors affecting perception of the importance of PSM were whether hospital employees were in contact with patients while on duty, weekly working hours, education on PSM, and perceived adequacy of PSM system construction. Factors affecting the practice of PSM were perceived adequacy of work load, perceived adequacy of PSM system construction and perception of its importance. Conclusion The findings of this study indicate a need for developing strategies to improve perception of the importance and practice of PSM among all hospital employees, and provide a reference for future experimental studies.
    Asian Nursing Research 03/2013; 7(1):26–32. DOI:10.1016/j.anr.2013.01.001 · 1.00 Impact Factor
Show more


18 Reads
Available from