Workflow interruptions and stress atwork: a mixed-methods study among physicians and nurses of a multidisciplinary emergency department

Abstract

ObjectivesDealing with multiple workflow interruptions is a major challenge in emergency department (ED) work. This study aimed to establish a taxonomy of workflow interruptions that takes into account the content and purpose of interruptive communication. It further aimed to identify associations of workflow interruptions with ED professionals’ work stress.DesignCombined data from expert observation sessions and concomitant self-evaluations of ED providers.SettingED of an academic community hospital in Germany.ParticipantsMultidisciplinary sample of ED physicians and nurses. 77 matched observation sessions of interruptions and self-evaluations of work stress were obtained on 20 randomly selected days.Outcome measuresED professionals’ stress evaluations were based on standardised measures. ED workload data on patient load, patient acuity and staffing were included as control variables in regression analyses.ResultsOverall mean rate was 7.51 interruptions/hour. Interruptions were most frequently caused by ED colleagues of another profession (27.1%; mean interruptions/hour rate: 2.04), by ED colleagues of the same profession (24.1%; 1.81) and by telephone/beeper (21%; 1.57). Concerning the contents of interruption events, interruptions most frequently occurred referring to a parallel case under care (30.3%, 2.07), concerning the current case (19.1%; 1.28), or related to coordination activities (18.2%, 1.24). Regression analyses revealed that interruptive communication related to parallel cases significantly increased ED providers’ stress levels (β=0.24, P=0.03). This association remained significant after controlling for ED workload.DiscussionInterruptions that refer to parallel cases under care were associated with increased stress among ED physicians and nurses. Our approach to distinguish between sources and contents of interruptions contributes to an improved understanding of potential benefits and risks of workflow interruptions in ED work environments. Despite some limitations, our findings add to future research on the implications of interruptions for effective and safe patient care and work in complex and dynamic care environments.