TY - JOUR T1 - A System Dynamics Model for Effects of Workplace Violence and Clinician Burnout on Agitation Management in the Emergency Department JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258632 SP - 2021.06.16.21258632 AU - Ambrose H. Wong AU - Nasim S. Sabounchi AU - Hannah R. Roncallo AU - Jessica M. Ray AU - Rebekah Heckmann Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/22/2021.06.16.21258632.abstract N2 - Background Over 1.7 million episodes of agitation occur annually across the United States in emergency departments (EDs), some of which lead to workplace assaults on clinicians and require invasive methods like physical restraints to maintain staff and patient safety. Recent studies demonstrated that experiences of workplace violence lead to symptoms of burnout, which may impact future decisions regarding use of physical restraints on agitated patients. To capture the dynamic interactions between clinicians and agitated patients under their care, we applied qualitative system dynamics methods to develop a model that describes causal feedback mechanisms of clinician burnout and the use of physical restraints to manage agitation.Methods We convened an interprofessional panel of clinician stakeholders and agitation experts for a series of model building sessions to develop the current model. The panel derived the final version of our model over ten sessions of iterative refinement and modification, each lasting approximately three to four hours. We incorporated findings from prior studies on agitation and burnout as a result of workplace violence, identifying interpersonal and psychological factors likely to influence our outcomes of interest to form the basis of our model.Results The final model resulted in five main sets of feedback loops that describe key narratives regarding the relationship between clinician burnout and agitated patients becoming physically restrained: (1) use of restraints decreases agitation and risk of assault, leading to increased perceptions of safety and decreasing use of restraints in a balancing feedback loop which stabilizes the system; (2) clinician stress leads to a perception of decreased safety and lower threshold to restrain, causing more stress in a negatively reinforcing loop; (3) clinician burnout leads to a decreased perception of colleague support which leads to more burnout in a negatively reinforcing loop; (4) clinician burnout leads to negative perceptions of patient intent during agitation, thus lowering threshold to restrain and leading to higher task load, more likelihood of workplace assaults, and higher burnout in a negatively reinforcing loop; and (5) mutual trust between clinicians causes increased perceptions of safety and improved team control, leading to decreased clinician stress and further increased mutual trust in a positively reinforcing loop.Conclusions Our system dynamics approach led to the development of a robust qualitative model that illustrates a number of important feedback cycles that underly the relationships between clinician experiences of workplace violence, stress and burnout, and impact on decisions to physically restrain agitated patients. This work identifies potential opportunities at multiple targets to break negatively reinforcing cycles and support positive influences on safety for both clinicians and patients in the face of physical danger.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementAmbrose H Wong is supported by the Robert E. Leet and Clara Guthrie Patterson Trust Mentored Research Award and the KL2 TR001862 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS), components of the National Institutes of Health and the National Institutes of Health Roadmap for Medical Research. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Our work received approval from the Yale University human investigation committee as an exempt study.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAt the time of publication of any manuscripts that arise from this research, the de-identified data for that manuscript will be made available to share for scholarly activities. Qualitative data will be shared as a de-identified Dedoose dataset, and quantitative data will be shared as a de-identified CSV file. Sharing of the data will require a Data Use Agreement to be established between the requesting institution and Yale University. Data will be shared through secure file transfer.EDemergency departmentSDsystem dynamicsWPVworkplace violence ER -