Suppr超能文献

临床治理失效:澳大利亚蓄意视而不见和检举的案例。

Clinical governance breakdown: Australian cases of wilful blindness and whistleblowing.

机构信息

RMIT University, Australia.

Deakin University, Australia.

出版信息

Nurs Ethics. 2019 Jun;26(4):1039-1049. doi: 10.1177/0969733017731917. Epub 2017 Nov 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

After their attempts to have patient safety concerns addressed internally were ignored by wilfully blind managers, nurses from Bundaberg Base Hospital and Macarthur Health Service felt compelled to 'blow the whistle'. Wilful blindness is the human desire to prefer ignorance to knowledge; the responsibility to be informed is shirked.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an account of instances of wilful blindness identified in two high-profile cases of nurse whistleblowing in Australia.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Critical case study methodology using Fay's Critical Social Theory to examine, analyse and interpret existing data generated by the Commissions of Inquiry held into Bundaberg Base Hospital and Macarthur Health Service patient safety breaches. All data was publicly available and assessed according to the requirements of unobtrusive research methods and secondary data analysis.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Data collection for the case studies relied entirely on publicly available documentary sources recounting and detailing past events.

FINDINGS

Data from both cases reveal managers demonstrating wilful blindness towards patient safety concerns. Concerns were unaddressed; nurses, instead, experienced retaliatory responses leading to a 'social crisis' in the organisation and to whistleblowing.

CONCLUSION

Managers tasked with clinical governance must be aware of mechanisms with the potential to blind them. The human tendency to favour positive news and avoid conflict is powerful. Understanding wilful blindness can assist managers' awareness of the competing emotions occurring in response to ethical challenges, such as whistleblowing.

摘要

背景

在管理层故意无视员工对患者安全的关切后,班达伯格基地医院和麦克阿瑟卫生服务中心的护士感到不得不“揭发”。故意无视是指人们宁愿选择无知也不愿获取知识;回避知情的责任。

目的

描述澳大利亚两起备受瞩目的护士揭发事件中发现的故意无视行为。

研究设计

采用 Fay 的批判性社会理论对班达伯格基地医院和麦克阿瑟卫生服务中心患者安全违规事件调查委员会的公开数据进行批判性案例研究,以审查、分析和解释现有的数据。所有数据都是公开的,并根据非干扰性研究方法和二次数据分析的要求进行评估。

伦理考虑

案例研究的数据完全依赖于公开的文献资料,这些资料叙述和详细说明了过去的事件。

发现

两个案例的数据都揭示了管理层对患者安全问题故意无视。问题未得到解决;护士反而受到报复性回应,导致组织内部出现“社会危机”,最终揭发事件发生。

结论

负责临床治理的管理者必须意识到可能导致其盲目决策的机制。人们更喜欢正面消息,回避冲突,这种倾向非常强大。了解故意无视可以帮助管理者意识到在面对揭发等道德挑战时,会出现相互矛盾的情绪。

相似文献

3
Understanding whistleblowing: qualitative insights from nurse whistleblowers.理解举报:护士举报者的定性洞察。
J Adv Nurs. 2010 Oct;66(10):2194-201. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05365.x. Epub 2010 Jul 2.
4
[Whistleblowing: a difficult concept for nurses].[举报:护士面临的一个难题]
Pflege. 2010 Oct;23(5):321-9. doi: 10.1024/1012-5302/a000065.
9
The process of whistleblowing in a Japanese psychiatric hospital.
Nurs Ethics. 2008 Sep;15(5):631-42. doi: 10.1177/0969733008092871.

引用本文的文献

5
Mapping clinical governance to practitioner roles and responsibilities.将临床治理映射到从业者的角色和责任。
J Health Organ Manag. 2020 Dec 18;ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print):18-33. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-02-2020-0065.

本文引用的文献

2
Moral courage in nursing: A concept analysis.护理中的道德勇气:一项概念分析
Nurs Ethics. 2017 Dec;24(8):878-891. doi: 10.1177/0969733016634155. Epub 2016 Mar 22.
3
Willful Blindness.
Am J Nurs. 2015 Jul;115(7):7. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000467252.24642.92.
7
Opinion divided on extent of cultural shift in health service.
Nurs Manag (Harrow). 2014 Jul;21(4):10-1. doi: 10.7748/nm.21.4.10.s11.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验