Keywords
workplace - violence - emergency - turkey - attack - injury
Introduction
Workplace violence is a serious health hazard that affects many occupations. More
serious violent injuries occur in health care from workplace violence than in all
other industries combined.[1]
Health care providers suffering from workplace violence are more likely to experience
posttraumatic stress disorder, feelings of insecurity, and worse rates of job satisfaction.[2] Employers of victims also suffer economically as they are the ones to primarily
shoulder the financial burden for medical and psychological treatments rendered.[3] Prior studies have reported high and increasing levels of workplace violence in
emergency departments (EDs) across the globe,[4] with targets including nurses,[5]
[6] attending physicians, and emergency medicine residents.[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12] Studies on workplace violence affecting physicians working in EDs throughout Turkey
are lacking.
This study surveyed physicians working in EDs in Turkey about incidents of workplace
violence within the past 12 months. The objective of this study was to quantify the
frequency and characterize the types of workplace violence experienced by physicians
working in EDs in Turkey.
Materials and Methods
Study Design and Setting
This study was a cross-sectional online survey of workplace violence experienced by
physicians working in EDs in Turkey. The survey (Appendix 1) was modeled after a statewide
survey of emergency physicians in Michigan[2] who recalled experiencing violent encounters from the past 12 months. Our survey
was translated into Turkish and tested among six Turkish emergency physicians and
some questions were modified per their recommendations. We used an electronic survey
via Google that was distributed via email. This study is compliant with the Strengthening
The Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Approval
was obtained from the Ethics Department (IRB-equivalent) at Hasan Kalyoncu University,
Gaziantep, Turkey. The survey was voluntary and consent was given by way of clicking
past the first page online.
Selection of Participants
A list of physicians, including residents, working in EDs was obtained from a national
emergency physicians association. Email invitations to participate in the online survey
were sent to 2,454 physicians beginning October 20, 2017. Because only 100 surveys
could be distributed per day, emails were distributed over a 25-day period. A follow-up
email to nonresponders was sent after approximately 1 month. The study period closed
in January 1, 2018. To focus on physicians primarily working clinically in the ED,
an a priori decision was made to exclude those working less than 20 hours per week.
Methods of Measurement
To allow for meaningful scientific comparison of results with other similar studies,
we utilized the same four categories of violence (verbal threat, physical altercation,
confrontation, and stalking) that have been used in multiple studies[2]
[11]
[13] and added sexual harassment as a fifth type of violence (Appendix 2).
Demographic information collected of surveyed physicians included sex, medical training,
number of hours worked, timing of clinical shifts, population size served in location
of primary hospital of employment, type of hospital, whether the hospital has an emergency
medicine residency program, and the estimated number of patients per day seen in the
ED.
Surveys included characteristics of the perpetrators and physicians’ reactions to
the violence experienced. Perpetrators of violence were further categorized as being
the patient, family member, patient’s friend, and whether the perpetrator appeared
to be clinically intoxicated with alcohol or drugs, or if they seemed mentally unstable.
Incidents of workplace violence within the past 12 month were categorized according
to frequency (0, 1–2, 3–5, 6–10, > 10 episodes).
Response to violence was assessed by inquiring about forms of personal protection
used, and longstanding psychological effects of workplace violence were evaluated.
We also assessed participants’ immediate reaction to violence and if services designed
to prevent, mitigate, and manage workplace violence are offered to staff at the hospitals
our participants work in, and if survey participants are interested in such resources.
Participants were also queried to whom, if anyone, they reported the violent incident(s)
to, and if they personally fear being victimized at work. Information about presence
and effectiveness of hospital security and police services, feedback on presence of
laws and hospital rules to protect staff from violence, and whether hospitals employed
any rules limiting the number of visitors and loitering were also obtained. The perception
of improving or worsening safety at the workplace over the course of the participant’s
professional career was assessed, as were possible causes for the violent attacks.
Data Collection and Processing
In an attempt to minimize duplicate entries, surveys were individually numbered in
Google and their links were deactivated upon survey completion. Responses were automatically
saved into an online repository (Google). The data were exported into Excel for analysis.
All data were collected electronically and anonymously.
Primary Data Analysis
The normality of distribution of continuous variables was tested by Shapiro–Wilk test.
Mann–Whitney U test was used for comparison of two independent groups of variables with a nonnormal
distribution. Chi-square test was used to assess relation between categorical variables
and Bonferroni-adjusted significance level was used to determine significance and
account for multiple testing. Descriptive statistic parameters were presented as frequency,
percentage (%), and mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was performed
with SPSS (Version 22.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, United States) and a p-value of < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.
Results
Three hundred sixty-six physicians completed the survey; 4 were excluded because they
worked less than 20 hours/week clinically. A total of 362 responders were included.
Sixty-two percent of respondents were men and 38% were women. Sixty-two percent were
attending physicians, 27% were emergency medicine residents, and 12% were general
practitioners working full-time in the ED ([Table 1]). Our study included residents working in EDs because they often work without an
attending physician immediately available. Sixty-nine percent of respondents work
primarily in an urban (> 500,000 population) environment, 28% work in suburban areas
(< 500,000 population), and 3% in rural locations. Thirty-seven percent work in state
hospitals, 31% at university hospitals, 28% at training research hospitals, and 3%
work in private hospitals. The average number of ED patients per day was 334.
Table 1
Demographic information of participants
|
n (%)
|
Sex
|
Female
|
137 (37.8)
|
Male
|
225 (62.2)
|
Employment
|
General practitioner
|
42 (11.6)
|
Nonacademic emergency physician
|
198 (54.7)
|
Emergency resident
|
96 (26.5)
|
Academic emergency attending physician
|
26 (7.2)
|
Location of primary hospital employment
|
Urban (population > 500,000)
|
247 (68.2)
|
Urban (population < 500,000)
|
102 (28.2)
|
Suburban
|
7 (1.9)
|
Rural
|
6 (1.7)
|
Over 99% (n = 356) of physicians reported verbal abuse and 54% (n = 196) reported experiencing physical violence while working in the ED ([Fig. 1]). Forty-three percent (n = 157) experienced confrontation, 24.9% (n = 90) reported stalking, and 6.1% (n = 22) reported sexual harassment ([Table 2]).
Table 2
Physicians experiencing violence, by gender and type of violence
|
Physicians
|
p-value
|
Men
|
Women
|
n (%)
|
n (%)
|
Verbal threat
|
Yes
|
219 (97.3)
|
137 (100)
|
0.016
|
|
No
|
6 (2.7)
|
0 (0%)
|
|
Physical violence
|
Yes
|
128 (56.9)
|
68 (49.6)
|
0.173
|
No
|
97 (43.1)
|
69 (50.4)
|
|
Confrontation
|
Yes
|
105 (46.7)
|
50 (36.5)
|
0.099
|
No
|
120 (53.3)
|
87 (63.5)
|
|
Stalking
|
Yes
|
68 (30.2)
|
22 (16.1)
|
0.004
|
No
|
157 (69.8)
|
115 (83.9)
|
|
Sexual harassment
|
Yes
|
15 (6.7)
|
7 (5.1)
|
0.549
|
No
|
210 (93.3)
|
130 (94.9)
|
|
Fig. 1 Physicians experiencing workplace violence (by type and perpetrator, in preceding
12 months).
Family members of patients, not the patients themselves, were the most common perpetrators
of every form of workplace violence (verbal, physical, confrontation, stalking, and
sexual harassment) ([Table 3]). This coincides with our finding that hospitals limiting loitering and the number
of visitors were associated with a 14% absolute reduction in the number of physicians
reporting physical threats and 11% reduction in number of physicians reporting confrontations
in comparison to the baseline prevalence of violence in the entire study ([Table 4]).
Table 3
Rates of workplace violence, by type of violence and perpetrator
Total n = 362
|
Number of physicians experiencing violence (% of total n)
|
|
Physicians attacked (by any form of violence)
|
Verbal threat
|
Physical assault
|
Confrontation after patient care
|
Stalking
|
Sexual harassment
|
Perpetrators
|
Patient
|
299 (82.6%)
|
286 (79%)
|
104 (28.7%)
|
109 (30.1%)
|
58 (16.0%)
|
12 (3.3%)
|
Family member
|
344 (95%)
|
338 (93.4%)
|
150 (41.4%)
|
140 (38.7%)
|
76 (21%)
|
12 (3.3%)
|
Friend of patient
|
269 (74.3%)
|
261 (72.1%)
|
84 (23.2%)
|
87 (24.0%)
|
48 (13.3%)
|
5 (1.4%)
|
Intoxicated
|
298 (82.3%)
|
293 (80.9%)
|
93 (25.7%)
|
79 (21.8%)
|
43 (11.9%)
|
8 (2.2%)
|
Mentally ill
|
240 (66.3%)
|
227 (62.7%)
|
67 (18.5%)
|
62 (17.1%)
|
34 (9.4%)
|
3 (0.8%)
|
Table 4
Impact of preventing loitering on rate and types of violence
|
Does your hospital employ rules that prevent patients and visitors from loitering
in the emergency department?
|
Yes
|
No
|
p-value
|
n (%)
|
Verbal threat
|
Yes
|
29 (100)
|
322 (98.2)
|
0.311
|
No
|
0 (0)
|
6 (1.8)
|
|
Physical threat
|
Yes
|
9 (31.0)
|
182 (55.5)
|
0.011
|
No
|
20 (69.0)
|
146 (44.5)
|
|
Confrontation
|
Yes
|
19 (65.5)
|
133 (40.5)
|
0.009
|
No
|
10 (34.5)
|
195 (59.5)
|
|
Stalking
|
Yes
|
6 (20.7)
|
82 (25.0)
|
0.606
|
No
|
23 (79.3)
|
246 (75.0)
|
|
Sexual harassment
|
Yes
|
1 (3.4)
|
21 (6.4)
|
0.494
|
No
|
28 (96.6)
|
307 (93.6)
|
|
Only 23% of respondents indicated that their hospital offered information about preventing
and managing workplace violence even though 86% noted interest in outside resources
including legal and psychological support, conflict de-escalation techniques, and
self-defense classes. Thirty percent of respondents constantly fear and 36% frequently
fear becoming a victim of workplace violence while only 1% never had fear. These numbers
are surprising given that 89% indicated they had security staff that round in the
ED and the rest of the hospital and 46% had police officers in their hospital. Less
than 2% had no security staff. Eighty-nine percent of respondents felt that their
hospital does not employ a sufficient number of security staff, and 94% felt that
security guards or police do not provide adequate protection from violent encounters
([Table 5]). Ninety-two percent of respondents indicated that their hospital does not employ
rules preventing loitering and 87% stated their hospital does not limit the number
of visitors. Ninety percent indicated that current laws do not adequately protect
them. Eighty-two percent indicated that workplace violence has affected their ability
to provide patient care.
Table 5
Impact of police and security guards on rate and types of violence
|
Physicians experiencing violence (n = 362)
|
Verbal threat
|
Physical assault
|
Confrontation
|
Stalking
|
Sexual harassment
|
n (% of total n)
|
Police security officers present
|
Yes
|
147 (41.3%)
|
78 (40.6%)
|
62 (40.3%)
|
34 (37.8%)
|
9 (40.9%)
|
No
|
209 (58.7%)
|
114 (59.4%)
|
92 (59.7%)
|
56 (62.2%)
|
13 (59.1%)
|
If you have security guards, do they carry weapons?
|
Yes
|
14 (3.9%)
|
5 (2.6%)
|
6 (3.9%)
|
3 (3.3%)
|
0 (0%)
|
No
|
342 (96.1%)
|
187 (97.4%)
|
148 (96.1%)
|
87 (96.7%)
|
22 (100%)
|
Do you feel the security guards or police adequately protect you from violent encounters?
|
Yes
|
21 (5.9%)
|
6 (3.1%)
|
8 (5.2%)
|
6 (6.7%)
|
1 (4.5%)
|
No
|
335 (94.1%)
|
186 (96.9%)
|
146 (94.8%)
|
84 (93.3%)
|
21 (95.5%)
|
Of all types of violence reported (verbal, physical, confrontation, stalking, and
sexual harassment), only verbal abuse and stalking demonstrated a statistically significant
difference between men and women (30.2% vs. 16.1% of men and women, respectively,
reported having been stalked, p = 0.004) ([Table 2]). Number of years of experience was not correlated with likelihood of experiencing
physical violence, confrontation, stalking, or sexual harassment.
When asked about the suspected reasons that led to the violence experienced, physicians
cited inappropriate medical demands from patients such as unjustified medication prescriptions,
unnecessary work notes, unnecessary laboratory work to be performed (93.9%), alcohol
and drug abuse (71.9%), critical condition or death of a patient (58.1%), long time
spent in ED (51.8%), long time spent in the waiting room (41.3%), and mental health
disorders (38.8%). Two common themes that emerged from free-text responses included
excessive amounts of visitors and lack of legal protections for physicians.
While we suspected that physicians who were excluded a priori because they work less
than 20 hours per week clinically may not experience workplace violence as often,
all 4 excluded physicians cited some form of violence experienced in the preceding
12 months, similar to the included cohort.
Discussion
Workplace violence is a serious public health problem and occupational hazard that
is usually underreported[14] and continues to worsen. EDs have the highest rates of workplace violence of any
department in hospitals,[15] likely due to high acuity of pathology, perceived long wait times, increased levels
of stress among patients and family members, ED overcrowding, poor staffing levels,
unrealistic clinical expectations, availability of weapons including a lack of screening
by hospitals possibly concerned about projecting an unsafe image to potential patrons,
the general perception that violence is tolerated with reporting incidents having
no effect, among other factors.[16]
While some studies have reported on workplace violence in EDs in Turkey,[8]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20] only one study has attempted to evaluate the rate of workplace violence among physicians
working in EDs in Turkey on a national level.[9]
Rates of workplace violence experienced by physicians working in EDs in Turkey are
similar to results from previous studies of physicians[9] and health care providers[20] in Turkey and those in Ankara, Turkey. Our results ([Table 2]) are also comparable to those from prior studies performed in Michigan by Kowalenko
et al[2] and Omar et al,[13] and across residency programs in the United States.[7] We found that 99.4% had been subjected to at least one form of violence, which is
very similar to findings by Bayram et al (99.7%).[9] Verbal abuse was reported by over 99% of physicians in Turkey versus 75% of attending
emergency physicians in Michigan[2] and 75% of residents and attending physicians across the United States.[7] Physical abuse was reported by 54% of physicians in Turkey versus 38.1% in Michigan[13] and 47% across the U.S. in a national survey conducted by the American College of
Emergency Physicians.[21] Previous studies of workplace violence report rates of verbal abuse of 80% in Ankara[11] and 88.6% in Denizli,[20] while rates of physical violence range from 41% in Ankara[11] to 49.4% in Denizli.[20] These results suggest that acts of workplace violence occur more frequently in Turkey
when compared with the United States, although the differences are subtle.
While some studies report that the most common perpetrators of violence are patients,[21]
[22]
[23] often under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or suffering from mental health conditions,[20] we found that relatives of patients were the main perpetrators of every form of
violence measured. This is consistent with results from India as reported by Sachdeva
et al,[24] Iran as reported by Shoghi et al,[6] and Turkey as reported by Talas et al,[11] Acik et al,[17] Aydin et al,[18] Ayranci,[19] Boz et al,[20] and Erkol et al.[12] This difference suggests that while the problem of workplace violence is similar
in many countries across the globe, the specific causes differ and proposed solutions
should be tailored accordingly.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration lists unrestricted public access
as one of the many contributors to workplace violence.[16] We found that hospitals that limited the number of visitors and prevented loitering
were associated with a 14% absolute reduction in physicians reporting physical threats
and an 11% absolute reduction in physicians reporting experiencing confrontations.
Given that 87% of physicians indicated that their EDs do not limit the number of visitors
and 92% do not prevent loitering, we believe restricting access to a select number
of visitors per patient has the potential to significantly decrease the rates of workplace
violence across the vast majority of EDs in Turkey.
Only 23% of respondents indicated that their hospital offered information about preventing
and managing workplace violence even though 86% noted interest in outside resources
including legal and psychological support, conflict de-escalation techniques, and
self-defense classes. This may explain why Talas et al found that the main reaction
to violence was that victims of workplace violence “did nothing and kept silent.”
Arming physicians with these tools may prevent the development of a helpless mentality
many may experience before, during, or after a violent attack. The high rates of physicians
feeling unsafe at work are surprising given that 89% indicated they had security staff
that round in the ED and the rest of the hospital. Forty-six percent had police officers
in their hospital. Less than 2% had no security staff. Eighty-nine percent of respondents
felt that their hospital does not employ a sufficient number of security staff, and
94% felt that security guards or police do not adequately protect them from violent
encounters. This explains why the rate of every form of violence was unchanged whether
there was police security officers. However, the minority of physicians who had security
guards that carried weapons reported lower rates of every type of violence ([Table 5]). This all suggests that the physical presence of security personnel alone may not
suffice and that greater authority for them to disperse or detain dangerous or abusive
individuals may be of benefit. Limits to the authority and willingness to enforce
laws and rules, or to use force by security personnel is likely influenced by cultural
norms and expectations as well as the lack of any specific legal protection afforded
to health care workers. Anecdotally, many security officers have mentioned lack of
legal protection from perpetrators of violence as the reason for not protecting health
care workers, because many are privately employed security guards and not government
employees like police officers. Ninety percent of physicians indicated that current
laws do not adequately protect them. This has been exemplified repeatedly in perpetrators
of violence against physicians often suffering little legal ramifications, often being
released from jail before the victimized physicians were discharged from the hospitals
treating their injuries.[25] Between the presentation of this abstract and the publication of this article, Turkey
passed a federal law[26] punishing perpetrators of violence against health care providers with 1.5 times
the normal sentence. The impact of this law has yet to be seen.
Eighty-two percent indicated that workplace violence has affected their ability to
provide patient care. Erdur et al[27] found that physicians experiencing workplace violence in Turkey exhibited higher
levels of burnout. The cost of recruiting, hiring, and training nurses can be expensive.
While workplace violence has traditionally been considered a problem of an individual
victim, the reality is that hospitals and the entire health care system are adversely
impacted by these transgressions.
We believe overcrowding and understaffing of EDs in Turkey is an important contributor
to the high levels of workplace violence. In 2015, there were over 110 million ED
visits in Turkey[28] which was approximately 1.43 visits/person, a rate more than three times higher
than 0.43 visits/person in the United States.[29] Systemic overreliance on EDs for care that costs nothing to patients leading to
overcrowding combined with high patient expectations and systemic understaffing of
physicians likely contributes to the higher rates of workplace violence. In many hospitals,
it is not uncommon for physicians to be required to see 10 patients per hour. Patient
and family expectations for cures and perceived lack of repercussions for violence
also are likely to be important factors contributing to the high rates of workplace
violence.
Limitations
Even though physical altercations and stalking usually invoke strong visceral reactions
and memories, the retrospective nature of this study may introduce recall bias. Prospective
studies would be beneficial. The response rate of 14.9%, while similar to the 11%
response rate in the American College of Emergency Physicians’ survey on workplace
violence,[21] was low which may impair our ability to generalize results. The large number of
questions, while providing good insight into this problem, likely contributed to a
lower response rate. While physicians completing surveys are probably more likely
to have experienced violence, even if all the nonresponders experienced no violence,
having 14.4 and 9.7% of physicians experience verbal abuse and physical assaults,
respectively, would still be considered unacceptable in any work environment. Suspicion
of alcohol or drug use in the perpetrators of violence was likely the subjective opinion
of the physician. Less than 3% of responders worked in rural areas which may introduce
selection bias as busier EDs with sicker patients may be overrepresented.
Conclusion
In conclusion, workplace violence is a real danger experienced by physicians working
in EDs in Turkey, similar to those in the United States demonstrating this problem
transcends borders. Limiting the number of visitors and preventing loitering was associated
with a lower incidence of violent attacks. Our results suggest that the more frequent
perpetrators of violence (patients’ family and friends in Turkey as opposed to an
intoxicated or mentally unstable patient in the U.S.) vary. The difference in the
root causes highlights the need for nuanced solutions. Further studies should assess
root causes of violent behaviors of patients and their visitors, perceived or actual
hindrances limiting security personnel’s ability to protect physicians, as well as
possible (administrative, social, and legal) mechanisms to minimize such violence.