Abstract:Phenomenon: Effective communication between team members is essential during the resuscitation of critically-ill patients. Failure of junior doctors to speak up and challenge erroneous clinical decisions made by their senior doctors is a serious communication failure which can result in catastrophic outcomes and jeopardize patient safety. Crisis resource management (CRM) and conflict resolution tools have been increasingly employed in the healthcare setting to reduce communication failure among healthcare providers and improve patient safety during crisis situations. The aims of our study were to: 1) evaluate the factors affecting junior doctors' ability to speak up on medical errors, 2) examine the effectiveness of CRM and conflict resolution tools, and 3) formulate a communication framework directed at training junior doctors in appropriate intellectual questioning of authority. Approach: From January to April 2019, we recruited twenty-five second-year postgraduate junior doctors working in an Emergency Department in Singapore. We provided training in CRM and conflict resolution communication for participants in the intervention arm. Participants underwent a high-fidelity simulated resuscitation scenario which was standardized to include faculty misdirection in the form of erroneous instructions given by a role-played senior doctor. We observed if participants appropriately challenged the erroneous instructions. We subsequently interviewed participants on their response during the simulation to elicit their barriers and motivations toward challenging authority. Video recordings were analyzed by an independent panel of investigators. Findings: Participants employed various non-verbal and verbal approaches when challenging erroneous decisions. We uncovered multiple personal, interpersonal, and situation-based factors influencing the junior doctor's willingness to challenge erroneous decisions made by seniors. From their responses, we conceptualized a theoretical model designed as a "weighing scale" to demonstrate how junior doctor's eventual response is the outcome of a delicate interplay of multiple barriers and motivations. Our intervention did not significantly increase the participants' likelihood of challenging authority (69% in control arm vs 75% in intervention arm, p = 1.00). Insights: Our study provides insights into the mindset of junior doctors when faced with the dilemma of challenging authority on medical errors. Established CRM training may not be effective in addressing the challenges junior doctors face when communicating against the hierarchal gradient. We propose strategies to further develop and optimize CRM training to enhance its value for junior doctors. Drawing from our findings, we formulated a "SAFE" communication tool (State the safety concern, suggest Alternative course of action, Support with Facts, Engage via Enquiry) directed at helping junior doctors in appropriate intellectual questioning of authority.

How Doctors Talk About Medical Errors: A Qualitative Study of Junior Doctors' Experiences

A change of mind: Error motivation is shaped by error perceptions in different learning environments

Examining Barriers and Motivations to Speak up on Medical Errors in a Simulated Clinical Emergency: A Mixed-Methods Study

The impact of errors on healthcare professionals in the critical care setting

Learning from electronic prescribing errors: a mixed methods study of junior doctors' perceptions of training and individualised feedback data

Emotion and coping in the aftermath of medical error: a cross-country exploration

How Do We Learn About Error? A Cross-Sectional Study of Urology Trainees

Medical Error: Using Storytelling and Reflection to Impact Error Response Factors in Family Medicine Residents

Disclosure of medical errors to patients by medical professionals: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review

The place of error in the teaching field of heart surgery

How house officers cope with their mistakes.

Do house officers learn from their mistakes?

Junior doctors' perceptions of their self-efficacy in prescribing, their prescribing errors and the possible causes of errors

Individual and Team-Based Medical Error Disclosure: Dialectical Tensions Among Health Care Providers

Teaching Medical Students the Art of Medical Error Full Disclosure: Evaluation of a New Curriculum

Patients' and doctors' views and experiences of the patient safety trajectory of breast cancer care

Perception of Medical Error Among Resident Doctors at the University College Hospital (Uch), Ibadan

Nurses' experiences of reporting the medical errors of their colleagues: a qualitative study

When Bad Things Happen: Training Medical Students to Anticipate the Aftermath of Medical Errors

Relating Medical Errors to Medical Specialties: A Mixed Analysis Based on Litigation Documents and Qualitative Data.

Caring in the silences: why physicians and surgeons do not discuss emergency care and treatment planning with their patients - an analysis of hospital-based ethnographic case studies in England