This Opinion is limited
to the conduct of individual physicians and does not refer to physicians
acting as a collective, which is considered separately in Opinion 9.025,
"Collective Action and Patient Advocacy."
(1) Personal conduct, whether verbal or physical, that affects or that
potentially may affect patient care negatively constitutes disruptive
behavior. (This includes but is not limited to conduct that interferes with
one’s ability to work with other members of the health care team.) However,
criticism that is offered in good faith with the aim of improving patient
care should not be construed as disruptive behavior.
(2) Each medical staff should develop and adopt bylaw provisions or
policies for intervening in situations where a physician’s behavior is
identified as disruptive. The medical staff bylaw provisions of policies
should contain procedural safeguards that protect due process. Physicians
exhibiting disruptive behavior should be referred to a medical staff
wellness -- or equivalent committee.
(3) In developing policies that address physicians with disruptive
behavior, attention should be paid to the following elements:
(a) Clearly stating principal objectives in terms that ensure high
standards of patient care and promote a professional practice and work
environment.
(b) Describing the behavior or types of behavior that will prompt
intervention.
(c) Providing a channel through which disruptive behavior can be reported
and appropriately recorded. A single incident may not be sufficient for
action, but each individual report may help identify a pattern that requires
intervention.
(d) Establishing a process to review or verify reports of disruptive
behavior.
(e) Establishing a process to notify a physician whose behavior is
disruptive that a report has been made, and providing the physician with an
opportunity to respond to the report.
(f) Including means of monitoring whether a physician’s disruptive
conduct improves after intervention.
(g) Providing for evaluative and corrective actions that are commensurate
with the behavior, such as self-correction and structured rehabilitation.
Suspension of responsibilities or privileges should be a mechanism of final
resort. Additionally, institutions should consider whether the reporting
requirements of Opinion 9.031, "Reporting Impaired, Incompetent, or
Unethical Colleagues," apply in particular cases.
(h) Identifying which individuals will be involved in the various stages
of the process, from reviewing reports to notifying physicians and
monitoring conduct after intervention.
(i) Providing clear guidelines for the protection of confidentiality.
(j) Insuring that individuals who report physicians with disruptive
behavior are duly protected. (I, II, VIII) Issued December 2000 based on the
report "Physicians With Disruptive Behavior," adopted June 2000.
Last updated: Jul 23, 2002
Content provided by: Ethics