Dataset Information

Healthcare managers' experiences of technostress and the actions they take to handle it - a critical incident analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Healthcare managers, in comparison with other healthcare professionals, have an increased likelihood of experiencing technostress at work. Since knowledge about the causes and severity of technostress and about the strategies healthcare managers use to handle it is limited, the aim of this study was to describe their experience of technostress and the actions they employ to address it. METHODS:An explorative design based on the critical incident technique was used. In total, 20 healthcare managers (10 women, 10 men) from four hospitals in two county councils in Sweden were purposively selected according to professional background, hierarchical management position, control span, time in the management position, and sex. Semi-structured interviews with regard to critical incidents and actions taken to handle technostress were conducted. RESULTS:Healthcare managers' experiences of technostress (n?=?279) were categorised related to three main areas. These involved 'negative aspects of digital communication' (e.g. high workload, invasion of private life, and negative feelings related to digital communication), 'poor user experience of ICT systems (such as illogicality of the ICT system, time-consuming ICT system, or malfunctioning ICT system) and 'needs to improve organisational resources' (e.g. needs associated with digital literacy, user influence and distribution of work and ICT systems). Actions taken to handle technostress (n=196) were described relating to three main areas involving 'culture, norms and social support' (such as good email culture, and co-worker support), 'individual resources' (e.g. individual strategies and competence) and 'organisational resources' (such as IT-related assistance and support). CONCLUSIONS:Healthcare managers described negative aspects of digital communication, poor user experience of ICT systems, and lack of organisational resources as potential technostress creators. These problems were handled by taking action related to culture, norms and social support, and individual as well as organisational resources. All these features, along with consideration of healthcare managers' job demands and resources in general, should be incorporated into actions monitored by healthcare organisations to improve or maintain a sustainable digitalised environment for healthcare managers. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Regional Ethics Board in Linköping #2017/597-31. Registered 20 March 2018. URL not available.

SUBMITTER: Stadin M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7517792 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Healthcare managers' experiences of technostress and the actions they take to handle it - a critical incident analysis.

Stadin Magdalena M Nordin Maria M Fransson Eleonor I EI Broström Anders A

BMC medical informatics and decision making 20200925 1

<h4>Background</h4>Healthcare managers, in comparison with other healthcare professionals, have an increased likelihood of experiencing technostress at work. Since knowledge about the causes and severity of technostress and about the strategies healthcare managers use to handle it is limited, the aim of this study was to describe their experience of technostress and the actions they employ to address it.<h4>Methods</h4>An explorative design based on the critical incident technique was used. In t ...[more]

PMID: 32977817

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore factors shaping the experiences of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with infusible disease-modifying drugs in a hospital setting.Design and settingsThe critical incident technique served as a framework for collecting and analysing patients' qualitative account practices involving infusible disease-modifying drugs. Data were collected through semistructured interviews and one single-case study. Participants were recruited from all five regions in Denmark. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify and interpret factors shaping patients' infusion journey over time.ParticipantsTwenty-two patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis receiving infusion with disease-modifying drugs (natalizumab, alemtuzumab and ocrelizumab).ResultsFour time scenarios-preinfusion, day of infusion, long-term infusion and switch of infusion-associated with the infusion of disease-modifying drugs were analysed to reveal how different factors could both positively and negatively affect patient experience. Time taken to make the treatment decision was affected by participants' subjective perceptions of their disease activity; this may have set off a treatment dilemma in the event of a pressing need for treatment. Planning and routine made infusion practices manageable, but external and internal surroundings, including infusion room ambience and the quality of relationships with healthcare professionals and fellow patients, affected patients' cognitive state and well-being irrespective of the infusion regimen. Switching the infusion regimen can reactivate worries akin to the preinfusion scenario.ConclusionThis study provides novel insight into the positive and negative factors that shape patients' experience of infusion care practices. From a patient's perspective, an infusion practice is not a solitary event in time but includes planning and routine which become an integral part of their multiple sclerosis management. The quality of space and the ambience of the infusion room, combined with the relationship with healthcare professionals and fellow patients, can be a significant source of knowledge and support people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in their experience of agency in life.

Project description:Background Interprofessional teams contribute to patient safety during clinical care. However, little is known about how interprofessional teams manage and cope with critical incidents in the emergency department (ED). Therefore, the study aimed to describe healthcare professionals (HCPs) perceptions of critical incidents linked to the enablers of and barriers to interprofessional teamwork in a high-risk setting, the ED. Methods Individual interviews with HCPs regarding events at the ED were held during the period of May 2019–January 2020. The Critical Incident Technique approach was used to guide the interviews and the qualitative analysis. Data were analyzed inductively using qualitative content analysis. Results Interview participants (n = 28) included 7 physicians (25%), 12 registered nurses (43%), 7 nurse assistants (25%) and 2 administrators (7%). Overall, 108 critical incidents were described. Eight categories that described functional and dysfunctional experiences within interprofessional teamwork were identified: salience of reflection; professional experience makes a difference; demanding physical and psychosocial work environment; balancing communication demands; lacking management support, structure, and planning; tensions between professional role and responsibility; different views on interprofessional teamwork; and confidence in interprofessional team members. Conclusion Findings of this study indicate that poor ED-specific communication and limited professional experience are essential factors in handling critical incidents related to interprofessional teamwork. An important aspect of critical incident management is the ergonomics of the physical work environment and how it enables interprofessional teamwork. This study emphasizes the factors enabling interprofessional teamwork to manage critical incidents in the complex working environment of the ED. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-01034-0.

Project description:BackgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) are at high risk of occupational injuries and approximately 10-15% of patients are affected by an adverse event during their hospital stay. There is scarce scientific literature about how HCWs manage these risks in practice and what support they need. This knowledge is needed to improve safety for patients and HCWs. This study explores HCWs' experiences of workplace incidents that led to injury or posed a risk of patient and worker injury, with focus on HCWs' emotions and actions.MethodsThis study employed a qualitative design using the critical incident technique. Semi-structured individual interviews were held with 34 HCWs from three regions in Sweden. Data were analysed using inductive category development.ResultsAltogether 71 workplace incidents were reported. The analysis of two dimensions - the emotions HCWs feel and the actions team members and managers take when a workplace incident occurs - yielded two categories each: Anxiety during the incident, Persistent distress after the incident, Team interplay for safety actions and Support and ratification from managers and colleagues. Health care workers risked their own safety and health to provide patient safety. Teamwork and trustful relationships were critical for patient and worker safety. Support and validation from colleagues and managers were important for closure; unsatisfactory manager response and insufficient opportunities to debrief the incident could lead to persistent negative emotions. Participants described insecurity and fear, sadness over being injured at work, and shame and self-regret when the patient or themselves were injured. When the workplace had not taken the expected action, they felt anger and resignation, often turning into long-term distress.ConclusionsWork situations leading to injury or risk of patient and worker injury are emotionally distressing for HCWs. Team interplay may facilitate safe and dynamic practices and help HCWs overcome negative emotions. Organizational support is imperative for individual closure. For safety in health care, employers need to develop strategies for active management of risks, avoiding injuries and providing support after an injury.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Collaborative care treatment is widely recognized as an effective approach to improve the quality of mental healthcare through enhanced and structured collaboration between general practice and specialized psychiatry. However, studies indicate that the complexity of collaborative care treatment interventions challenge the implementation in real-life general practice settings. Four Danish Collaborative Care Models were launched in 2014 for patients with mild/moderate anxiety and depression. These involved collaboration between general practitioners, care managers and consultant psychiatrists. Taking a multi-practice bottom-up approach, this paper aims to explore the perceived barriers and enablers related to collaborative care for patients with mental health problems and to investigate the actual experiences with a Danish collaborative care model in a single-case study in order to identify enablers and barriers for successful implementation. METHODS:Combining interviews and observations of usual treatment practices, we conducted a multi-practice study among general practitioners who were not involved in the Danish collaborative care models to explore their perspectives on existing mental health treatment and to investigate (from a bottom-up approach) their perceptions of and need for collaborative care in mental health treatment. Additionally, by combining observations and qualitative interviews, we followed the implementation of a Danish collaborative care model in a single-case study to convey identified barriers and enablers of the collaborative care model. RESULTS:Experienced and perceived enablers of the Danish collaborative care model mainly consisted of a need for new treatment options to deal with mild/moderate anxiety and depression. The model was considered to meet the need for a free fast track to high-quality treatment. Experienced barriers included: poor adaptation of the model to the working conditions and needs in daily general practice, time consumption, unsustainable logistical set-up and unclear care manager role. General practitioners in the multi-practice study considered access to treatment and not collaboration with specialised psychiatry to be essential for this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS:The study calls for increased attention to implementation processes and better adaptation of collaborative care models to the clinical reality of general practice. Future interventions should address the treatment needs of specific patient populations and should involve relevant stakeholders in the design and implementation processes.

Project description:Leadership is a key feature in implementation efforts, which is highlighted in most implementation frameworks. However, in studying leadership and implementation, only few studies rely on established leadership theory, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding what kinds of leadership managers should perform and under what circumstances. In industrial and organizational psychology, transformational leadership and contingent reward have been identified as effective leadership styles for facilitating change processes, and these styles map well onto the behaviors identified in implementation research. However, it has been questioned whether these general leadership styles are sufficient to foster specific results; it has therefore been suggested that the leadership should be specific to the domain of interest, e.g., implementation. To this end, an intervention specifically involving leadership, which we call implementation leadership, is developed and tested in this project. The aim of the intervention is to increase healthcare managers' generic implementation leadership skills, which they can use for any implementation efforts in the future.The intervention is conducted in healthcare in Stockholm County, Sweden, where first- and second-line managers were invited to participate. Two intervention groups are included, including 52 managers. Intervention group 1 consists of individual managers, and group 2 of managers from one division. A control group of 39 managers is additionally included. The intervention consists of five half-day workshops aiming at increasing the managers' implementation leadership, which is the primary outcome of this intervention. The intervention will be evaluated through a mixed-methods approach. A pre- and post-design applying questionnaires at three time points (pre-, directly after the intervention, and 6 months post-intervention) will be used, in addition to process evaluation questionnaires related to each workshop. In addition, interviews will be conducted over time to evaluate the intervention.The proposed intervention represents a novel contribution to the implementation literature, being the first to focus on strengthening healthcare managers' generic skills in implementation leadership.

Dataset Information

Healthcare managers' experiences of technostress and the actions they take to handle it - a critical incident analysis.

Publications

Healthcare managers' experiences of technostress and the actions they take to handle it - a critical incident analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets