Mandu Stephene Ekpenyong, Mathew Nyashanu, Amina Ibrahim and Laura Serrant
Whistleblowing is a procedure where an existing or past participant of an establishment reveals actions and practices believed to be illegal, immoral or corrupt, by individuals…
Abstract
Purpose
Whistleblowing is a procedure where an existing or past participant of an establishment reveals actions and practices believed to be illegal, immoral or corrupt, by individuals who can influence change. Whistleblowing is an important means of recognising quality and safety matters in the health-care system. The aim of this study is to undergo a literature review exploring perceived barriers of whistleblowing in health care among health-care professionals of all grades and the possible influences on the whistleblower.
Design/methodology/approach
An integrative review of both quantitative and qualitative studies published between 2000 and 2020 was undertaken using the following databases: CINAHL Plus, Embase, Google Scholar, Medline and Scopus. The primary search terms were “whistleblowing” and “barriers to whistleblowing”. The quality of the included studies was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme criteria. The authors followed preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (Prisma) in designing the research and also reporting.
Findings
A total of 11 peer-reviewed articles were included. Included papers were analysed using constant comparative analysis. The review identified three broad themes (cultural, organisational and individual) factors as having a significant influence on whistleblowing reporting among health-care professionals.
Originality/value
This study points out that fear is predominantly an existing barrier causing individuals to hesitate to report wrongdoing in care and further highlights the significance of increasing an ethos of trust and honesty within health care.
Details
Keywords
Cyril Eshareturi and Laura Serrant
This paper reports on a regionally based UK study uncovering what has worked well in learning from adverse incidents in hospitals. The purpose of this paper is to review the…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper reports on a regionally based UK study uncovering what has worked well in learning from adverse incidents in hospitals. The purpose of this paper is to review the incident investigation methodology used in identifying strengths or weaknesses and explore the use of a database as a tool to embed learning.
Design/methodology/approach
Documentary examination was conducted of all adverse incidents reported between 1 June 2011 and 30 June 2012 by three UK National Health Service hospitals. One root cause analysis report per adverse incident for each individual hospital was sent to an advisory group for a review. Using terms of reference supplied, the advisory group feedback was analysed using an inductive thematic approach. The emergent themes led to the generation of questions which informed seven in-depth semi-structured interviews.
Findings
“Time” and “work pressures” were identified as barriers to using adverse incident investigations as tools for quality enhancement. Methodologically, a weakness in approach was that no criteria influenced the techniques which were used in investigating adverse incidents. Regarding the sharing of learning, the use of a database as a tool to embed learning across the region was not supported.
Practical implications
Softer intelligence from adverse incident investigations could be usefully shared between hospitals through a regional forum.
Originality/value
The use of a database as a tool to facilitate the sharing of learning from adverse incidents across the health economy is not supported.