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

Lost in Translation: Google’s Translation of Palliative Care to ‘Do-Nothing Care’

by: Cynthia X. Pan, MD, FACP, AGSF (@Cxpan5X)

My colleagues often ask me: “Why are Chinese patients so resistant to hospice and palliative care?” “Why are they so unrealistic?” “Don’t they understand that death is part of life?” “Is it true that with Chinese patients you cannot discuss advance directives?”

As a Chinese speaking geriatrician and palliative care physician practicing in Flushing, NY, I have cared for countless Chinese patients with serious illnesses or at end of life.  Invariably, when Chinese patients or families see me, they ask me if I speak Chinese. When I reply “I do” in Mandarin, the relief and instant trust I see on their faces make my day meaningful and worthwhile.

At my hospital, the patient population is about 30% Asian, with the majority of these being Chinese. Most of these patients require language interpretation.  It becomes an interesting challenge and opportunity, as we often need to discuss advance directives, goals of care, and end of life care options…

Elderhood: Podcast with Louise Aronson

In this week's podcast we talk with Louise Aronson MD, MFA, Professor of Geriatrics at UCSF about her new book Elderhood, available for purchase now for delivery on the release date June 11th.

We are one of the first to interview Louise, as she has interviews scheduled with other lesser media outlets to follow (CBS This Morning and Fresh Air with Terry...somebody).

This book is tremendously rich, covering a history of aging/geriatrics, Louise's own journey as a geriatrician facing burnout, aging and death of family of Louise's members, insightful stories of patients, and more.

We focus therefore on the 3 main things we think our listeners and readers will be interested in.

First - why the word "Elder" and "Elderhood" when JAGS/AGS and others recently decided that the preferred terminology was "older adult"?

Second - Robert Butler coined the term ageism in 1969 - where do we see ageism in contemporary writing/thinking?  We focus on Louise's…

Psychedelics: Podcast with Ira Byock

In this week's podcast, we talk with Dr. Ira Byock, a leading palliative care physician, author, and public advocate for improving care through the end of life.

Ira Byock wrote a provocative and compelling paper in the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management titled, "Taking Psychedelics Seriously."

In this podcast we challenge Ira Byock about the use of psychedelics for patients with serious and life-limiting illness.   Guest host Josh Biddle (UCSF Palliative care fellow) asks, "Should clinicians who prescribe psychedelics try them first to understand what their patient's are going through?" The answer is "yes" -- read or listen on for more!

While you're reading, I'll just go over and lick this toad.

-@AlexSmithMD





You can also find us on Youtube!



Listen to GeriPal Podcasts on:
iTunes Google Play MusicSoundcloudStitcher
Transcript
Eric: Welcome to the GeriPal Podcast. This is Eric Widera.

Alex: This is Alex Smith.

Eric: Alex, I spy someone in our …