Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

Abusive patients: Is it time for accountability?

Lauren Vogel
CMAJ August 09, 2016 188 (11) E241-E242; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-5266
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Slapped, pinched, punched, groped, sworn at and spat on: many health workers have had enough. Increasingly they’re urging zero tolerance for the routine violence they face on the job. But what happens when the abuse comes from a patient who still needs care? Emerging efforts to monitor and hold patients accountable for violence may answer these and other questions.

Historically, health organizations have blamed the victims for failing to manage patients’ bad behaviour. Dr. Robert Swenson, chief of psychiatry at the Ottawa Hospital, recalls the guilt he felt following an attack by a female patient early in his career. “She was kept in the hospital and transferred to another doctor, and that felt like confirmation that I was the problem, when in fact she was fully responsible.”

It has been at least two decades since workplace violence was identified as an “emerging hazard” in health care, yet Swenson’s experience is still a common one. In Ontario, health workers make up 10% of the labour market, yet suffer 30.6% of injuries from workplace violence that result in time off. Nurses are more likely to be attacked at work than prison guards or police officers. The frequency of abuse is also alarming: in a 2014 Emergency Nurses Association study, participants experienced an average of six violent incidents in an 18-month period.

At the root of the problem is a persistent belief that abuse must be tolerated as “part of the job,” explains Irene Andress, chief nursing executive at the Michael Garron Hospital in Toronto. “Most organizations are sitting under a cloak of secrecy where people are very reluctant to report violence in the workplace.”

Patient flagging

At Michael Garron, identifying patients who pose a risk of violence has helped to communicate zero tolerance, Andress says. Patients with histories of abusive behaviour or who show “signs of escalating behaviour” wear identifying coloured bracelets and have “flags” added to their electronic medical records.

Figure

Identifying patients who pose a risk of violence is one way health facilities are protecting staff.

Image courtesy of vgajic/iStock

Patient flagging, combined with deescalation training and alarm devices for staff, has helped Michael Garron reduce the percentage of incidents in which “use of force” was necessary to contain a threat from 30% in 2007 to 8.9% in 2015. Andress also notes that staff confidence in the hospital’s commitment to safety has increased, along with reporting of abuse, suggesting that incidents were previously underreported.

“This is no different than when a patient is flagged for falls or pressure ulcers or having some kind of infection,” she says. “We put you in a particular environment. We wear gloves and masks. Why should we manage violent situations any differently?”

Flagging patients who may pose a risk but don’t have records of violence is becoming a leading practice, says Henrietta Van hulle, an executive director for Ontario’s Public Services Health and Safety Association (PSHSA). Michael Garron Hospital is one of a handful of institutions in Ontario using this approach, including Hotel Dieu Hospital in Kingston, Ont. and the Ottawa Hospital.

According to Van hulle, the main drawback to any kind of flagging is the potential for discrimination against marked patients. There is also still “some grey zone” when it comes to defining escalating behaviours. For example, should a raised voice or demanding attitude merit a flag? “You can’t put flagging in place without really hitting some of these issues with front-line staff,” Van hulle says.

PSHSA will soon release a flagging handbook and risk-assessment checklist to clarify which behaviours should be considered before applying a flag, who to involve in the decision, as well as when to revisit and remove the warnings.

At Michael Garron, flags stay on file indefinitely, but could be reviewed on a case–by-case basis, says Andress. She acknowledges that flagging can have a “negative connotation,” but denies that it could lead to lower-quality care for difficult patients. “We’re not using this to create a black mark against the individual,” she says. “It gives us history and context.”

Stronger sanctions

Physicians are also advocating for more serious legal consequences for patients who attack health workers. Last year, the Canadian Medical Association, General Council passed a motion 89% in favour of lobbying the federal government for specific Criminal Code protections for health workers, similar to the special penalties for assaults on police officers and public transit operators. A small group will suggest action to the CMA board, although no timelines have been set.

“Violence, which has been ubiquitous, does not need to be tolerated,” says Dr. Gary Chaimowitz, head of forensic psychiatry at St. Joseph’s Healthcare in Hamilton, who led the CMA motion. Stronger sanctions could deter “the part of violence that has a willful component,” he explains.

Patients seldom face charges for assaults on health workers because it’s assumed they cannot control their actions when impaired by distress, illness, drugs or alcohol. The reality is less clear cut, says Chaimowitz, who sits on Ontario’s Consent and Capacity Board. “We know that people make decisions about who they strike and they are more likely to strike at someone who can’t respond,” which is why workers lower in the health care hierarchy bear the brunt of abuse.

The Ottawa Hospital’s Swenson seconded Chaimowitz’s motion at the CMA meeting. Excluding some extreme cases, he argues that most patients are “capable of understanding and forming intent and would be deterred by a more severe penalty for attacking health care providers.”

Determining who should be held criminally responsible for their actions ultimately isn’t a health care decision, Swenson adds. “It’s a police and judicial decision.”

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 188 (11)
CMAJ
Vol. 188, Issue 11
9 Aug 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Abusive patients: Is it time for accountability?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Abusive patients: Is it time for accountability?
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Aug 2016, 188 (11) E241-E242; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5266

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Abusive patients: Is it time for accountability?
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Aug 2016, 188 (11) E241-E242; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5266
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Patient flagging
    • Stronger sanctions
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Addressing Workplace Violence
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Saying goodbye to CMAJ News
  • National survey highlights worsening primary care access
  • How Canadian hospitals are decreasing carbon emissions
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Canadian government
    • Physician health

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire