Perception and engagement in unprofessional behaviors of medical students and residents: a mixed-method study

Author:

Keshmiri FatemehORCID,Raadabadi MehdiORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe present study aimed to investigate perception and engagement in unprofessional behavior of residents and medical interns and explore the factors affecting their engagement in unprofessional behavior.MethodThis study has an explanatory (quantitative-qualitative) mixed-method design. This study was conducted at Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences in 2022–2023. Participants, including residents and medical interns (n = 169), were entered by stratified random sampling. A survey was conducted in the quantitative step. A by an unprofessional behavior in clinical practice questionnaire (29 items) was used. For each behavior, the participants were asked to report whether they (a) participated in the behavior and (b) stated that the behavior Is unprofessional. In the qualitative step, 17 participants contributed. The qualitative data were collected by semi-structured interviews and analyzed according to the conventional content analysis approach Graneheim and Lundman introduced.ResultsThe highest ratio of participants’ engagement in unprofessional behavior was reported in ‘failure to introduce yourself and nurses and physician assistants to the patient and his family’ (n = 145 (85.8%)). The results showed the proportion of participants who engaged in unprofessional behavior more than those who did not participate. There were associations between participants’ engagement in each behavior and their perception of that particular behavior as unprofessional. (p = 0.0001). In the following behaviors, although the participants acknowledged that these behaviors were unprofessional, those who participated in the unprofessional behaviors were significantly more than those who did not participate: failure to comply with clinic regulations and policy (p = 0.01), eating or drinking in the hallway of the clinic (p = 0.01), medical negligence in duties in the clinic setting (p = 0.04) and failure to perform duties in teamwork (p = 0.04). The qualitative results were explored in a theme entitled “internalized unprofessional culture,” including three categories “encouraging contextual risk factors towards unprofessionalism,” “suppressing of unprofessionalism reporting,” and “disbelieving professionalism as a key responsibility.”ConclusionThe results indicated that most participants engaged in unprofessional behaviors. The findings resulted from the internalized unprofessional culture in the workplace. The findings showed that engagement in unprofessional behaviors resulted from personal and systemic factors. The weakness of responsibility recognition and identity formation as a professional facilitated the engagement in unprofessional behaviors at the personal level. Furthermore, systemic factors including the contextual risk factors (such as deficiency of explicit and hidden curriculum), and the suppression of unprofessionalism reporting mechanism as a hidden factor played an important role in normalizing unprofessional behavior and promoting engagement in unprofessional behaviors among the participants. Recognition of the nature and extent of students’ unprofessional behaviors facilitates educational discussion among teachers and students in this field. The results might assist to establish an assessment system and feedback mechanism to solve the problem of the “failure to fail” problem. In addition, these results provide medical educators insights into the development of professional courses that equip learners with adherence to professionalism and coping skills to deal with unprofessionalism in the healthcare system.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Family Practice

Reference56 articles.

1. Martinez W, Lehmann LS, Thomas EJ, Etchegaray JM, Shelburne JT, Hickson GB, et al. Speaking up about traditional and professionalism-related patient safety threats: a national survey of interns and residents. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(11):869–80.

2. Freidson E. Professionalism. The third logic. 1st ed. UK: Polity Press; 2001.

3. Sethuraman K, editor. Professionalism in medicine. Regional Health Forum; 2006.

4. Dhai A, Veller M, Ballot D, Mokhachane M. Pandemics, professionalism and the duty of care: concerns from the coalface. South Afr Med J. 2020;110(6):450–2.

5. Langendyk V, Mason G, Wang S. How do medical educators design a curriculum that facilitates student learning about professionalism? Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:32.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3