Skip to main content

Why you got to be so rude: the impact of rudeness on the performance of medical teams


A fascinating study came out in Pediatrics recently on the impact rudeness plays on the performance of teams that I just couldn't help but write about (partially because I cant get that song out of my head from the video at the bottom of this post).

Enough about you Eric, tell me about the study

Ok. Let’s break it down real quick. The authors took 72 Israeli NICU professionals organized into 24 teams and put them in a training simulation involving a preterm infant whose is getting sicker due to necrotizing enterocolitis. These teams were evaluated in their performance in the simulation by 3 independent judges who used structured questionnaires to assess diagnostic performance, procedural performance, information-sharing, and help-seeking.

Now here is the rub. Before the start of the simulation a "visiting" head of an American ICU joined via webcame to observe and comment (While the article didn't include picutres, I’m thinking this person had a mustache, maybe like Ron Burgundy). The teams were then randomized to either have this expert express either mildly rude statements completely unrelated to the teams’ performance or just some neutral comments. The mildly rude statetments from the US expert included:
  • Prior to the start of the simulation, the expert told participants that he had already observed a number of groups from other hospitals in Israel, and compared with the participants observed elsewhere, he was “not impressed with the quality of medicine in Israel.”
  • During a break 10 minutes into the simulation, the US expert was asked if he had any comments to which he replied that while he liked some of what he observed during his visit, medical staff like those observed in Israel “wouldn’t last a week” in his department.  He also said that he hoped participants could improve and learn more from the workshop, he also hoped that he would not get sick while in Israel.

What did they find?

Teams exposed to the mildly rude comments than to the neutral comments from the “foreign expert” had significantly worse diagnostic scores (2.6 vs 3.2 [P = .005]) and procedural performance scores  (2.8 vs 3.3 [P = .008]).  Furthermore, rudeness negatively influenced team information sharing and help-seaking.

But is this really a study of rudeness?

For me the biggest limitation of this trial is whether it was truly rudeness that had the negative impact, or whether it was other aspects in the expert’s statements that had the impact.

Lets start with whether the comments were truly rude. Whether an action is rude depends on whether an action complies with the social norms or etiquette of a group or culture.  So what is rude to in a medicine culture may not be rude in a surgical culture.  The study apparently assessed perceived rudeness.  What they found was the rude expert as compared to the control expert was more rude on a 4 point rudeness perception scale. So, I think it it is safe to assume that he was rude.

The statements though were also judgmental. It may be the passing judgment on others (as well as disparaging others) may adversely affect a teams performance, especially in situations where they are being evaluated like a simulation.

Take home point

Given these limitations, it doesn't really matter in the end when it comes to the take home: don't be so rude or judgemental or disparaging, it may impact your teams performance.

by: Eric Widera (@ewidera)

Comments

when I was looking for something on the internet and it turns out I found an interesting article and go to your website . I read carefully and found a very interesting article , add insight . I will share to my friends about what I get from your website .

Obat Paru Paru Basah
Obat Herbal Paru Paru
Pengobatan Paru Paru Basah
Obat Paru Paru Basah Herbal
Obat Paru Basah

Popular posts from this blog

The Dangers of Fleet Enemas

The dangers of oral sodium phosphate preparations are fairly well known in the medical community. In 2006 the FDA issued it’s first warning that patients taking oral sodium phosphate preparations are at risk for potential for acute kidney injury. Two years later, over-the-counter preparations of these drugs were voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturers.  Those agents still available by prescription were given black box warnings mainly due to acute phosphate nephropathy that can result in renal failure, especially in older adults. Despite all this talk of oral preparations, little was mentioned about a sodium phosphate preparation that is still available over-the-counter – the Fleet enema.

Why Oral Sodium Phosphate Preparations Are Dangerous 

Before we go into the risks of Fleet enemas, lets spend just a couple sentences on why oral sodium phosphate preparations carry significant risks. First, oral sodium phosphate preparations can cause significant fluid shifts within the colon …

Dying without Dialysis

There is a terrific article in this weeks Journal of Pain and Symptom Management by Fliss Murtagh of King's College in London about the epidemiology of symptoms for patients with advanced renal failure who die without dialysis.  This study is important because while we know that patients with advanced renal failure have a limited life expectancy and the average age of initiation of hemodialysis is increasing, we know little about the alternatives to hemodialysis.  Specifically, we know nothing about symptoms affecting quality of life among patients who elect not to start dialysis (so called "conservative management" - is this the best label?).  This article provides a terrific counterpoint to the article in last years NEJM showing that nursing home residents who initiated hemodialysis tended to die and decline in function (see GeriPal write up here). 

The study authors followed patients with the most advanced form of chronic kidney disease (the new name for renal failu…

Survival from severe sepsis: The infection is cured but all is not well

Severe sepsis is a syndrome marked by a severe infection that results in the failure of at least one major organ system: For example, pneumonia complicated by kidney failure. It is the most common non-cardiac cause of critical illness and is associated with a high mortality rate.

But what happens to those who survive their hospitalization for severe sepsis? An important study published in JAMA from Iwashyna and colleagues provides answers and tells us all is not well. When the patient leaves the hospital, the infection may be cured, but the patient and family will need to contend with a host of major new functional and cognitive deficits.

Iwashyna examined disability and cognitive outcomes among 516 survivors of severe sepsis. These subjects were Medicare enrollees who were participants in the Health and Retirement Study. The average age of patients was 77 years.

When interviewed after discharge, most survivors were left with major new deficits in their ability to live independently. …