Understanding Conflict Management Styles in Anesthesiology Residents.

Autor:	Vasilopoulos T; From the Departments of Anesthesiology.; Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida., Giordano CR; From the Departments of Anesthesiology., Hagan JD; From the Departments of Anesthesiology., Fahy BG; From the Departments of Anesthesiology.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Anesthesia and analgesia [Anesth Analg] 2018 Oct; Vol. 127 (4), pp. 1028-1034.
DOI:	10.1213/ANE.0000000000003432
Abstrakt:	Background: Successful conflict resolution is vital for effective teamwork and is critical for safe patient care in the operating room. Being able to appreciate the differences in training backgrounds, individual knowledge and opinions, and task interdependency necessitates skilled conflict management styles when addressing various clinical and professional scenarios. The goal of this study was to assess conflict styles in anesthesiology residents via self- and counterpart assessment during participation in simulated conflict scenarios. Methods: Twenty-two first-year anesthesiology residents (first postgraduate year) participated in this study, which aimed to assess and summarize conflict management styles by 3 separate metrics. One metric was self-assessment with the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI), summarized as percentile scores (0%-99%) for 5 conflict styles: collaborating, competing, accommodating, avoiding, and compromising. Participants also completed self- and counterpart ratings after interactions in a simulated conflict scenario using the Dutch Test for Conflict Handling (DUTCH), with scores ranging from 5 to 25 points for each of 5 conflict styles: yielding, compromising, forcing, problem solving, and avoiding. Higher TKI and DUTCH scores would indicate a higher preference for a given conflict style. Sign tests were used to compare self- and counterpart ratings on the DUTCH scores, and Spearman correlations were used to assess associations between TKI and DUTCH scores. Results: On the TKI, the anesthesiology residents had the highest median percentile scores (with first quartile [Q1] and third quartile [Q3]) in compromising (67th, Q1-Q3 = 27-87) and accommodating (69th, Q1-Q3 = 30-94) styles, and the lowest scores for competing (32nd, Q1-Q3 = 10-57). After each conflict scenario, residents and their counterparts on the DUTCH reported higher median scores for compromising (self: 16, Q1-Q3 = 14-16; counterpart: 16, Q1-Q3 = 15-16) and problem solving (self: 17, Q1-Q3 = 16-18; counterpart: 16, Q1-Q3 = 16-17), and lower scores for forcing (self: 13, Q1-Q3 = 10-15; counterpart: 13, Q1-Q3 = 13-15) and avoiding (self: 14, Q1-Q3 = 10-16; counterpart: 14.5, Q1-Q3 = 11-16). There were no significant differences (P > .05) between self- and counterpart ratings on the DUTCH. Overall, the correlations between TKI and DUTCH scores were not statistically significant (P > .05). Conclusions: Findings from our study demonstrate that our cohort of first postgraduate year anesthesiology residents predominantly take a more cooperative and problem-solving approach to handling conflict. By understanding one's dominant conflict management style through this type of analysis and appreciating the value of other styles, one may become better equipped to manage different conflicts as needed depending on the situations.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu