BMJ Leader最新文献

Purpose: While there are studies on this topic, there may be a relative scarcity of research focusing on specific regions, such as Jordan. So, this study aims to gather insights from healthcare providers in Jordan concerning the advantages of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into practices, their perspectives on AI applications in healthcare, and their views on the future role of AI in replacing key tasks within health services.

Method: An online questionnaire was used to collect data on demographics, attitudes towards using AI for tasks and opinions on the benefits of AI adoption among healthcare professionals. For healthcare professionals with restricted internet access or older people, soft copies of the questionnaire were provided to them, and then their responses were collected. A one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the associations between the determinants and the outcomes. Any test with a p value ≤0.05 was considered significant.

Results: A total of 612 healthcare professionals participated in the survey, with females comprising a majority of respondents (52.8%). The majority of respondents showed optimism about AI's potential to improve and revolutionise the field, although there were concerns about AI replacing human roles. Generally, physical therapists, medical researchers and pharmacists displayed openness to incorporating AI into their work routines. Younger individuals aged <40 seemed accepting of AI in the domain. A significant portion of participants believed that AI could negatively impact job opportunities.

Conclusion: To conclude, the results of this study suggest that healthcare professionals, in Jordan, hold receptive views on incorporating AI in the medical field, similar to their counterparts in developed nations. However, there is a concern about the implications of AI on job stability and potential replacements.

A doctor's ability to demonstrate compassion and empathy-the essence of bedside manners-remains as crucial today as ever. Yet modern medical training does not prepare doctors to meet the social and emotional demands of a rapidly changing clinical environment. Prompted by Debrett's reframing of 'modern manners', the authors explore how social protocols for manners apply in the healthcare setting. They identify three key areas where better etiquette could make a tangible difference for patients and carers: digital communication, day-to-day interactions on wards, authentically apologising. They note that graduating healthcare professionals often lack structured guidance on sustaining face-to-face empathy in an increasingly digital world. Similarly, small acts of politeness and genuine acknowledgement of a patient's reality during day-to-day interaction (such as timely updates or warm personal greetings) can significantly defuse anxiety. They also point out that a well-placed, heartfelt apology can restore trust when things go wrong, a skill rarely discussed in formal training. The authors argue that embedding these simple, modern manners into everyday practice is not just an optional extra; it is a vital professional competency. By explicitly teaching and modelling interpersonal skills alongside clinical or technical training, they suggest medical educators can better equip the next generation to address patients' emotional needs and enhance the overall care experience.

Background: Medical errors, while prominent in healthcare as one of the leading causes of mortality, remain a relatively unexplored area in veterinary medicine. The nature and frequency of such errors in this field are rarely reported or discussed, presenting a significant gap in understanding and improvement of veterinary practices. It is in this context that the importance of leadership styles emerge. Humble leadership involves acknowledging one's own limitations, actively seeking feedback and learning from it, and appreciating others' strengths and contributions. Such a leadership style has been linked to increased openness and error disclosure in various fields - a crucial step in mitigating medical errors.

Purpose: This study investigates the association between humble leadership and error disclosure in veterinary medicine, with a particular focus on the mediating role of psychological safety and safety climate.

Methods: A total of 669 responses were collected from veterinary staff across Australia to analyse the impact of leadership style on error disclosure. Model 4 of Hayes' PROCESS macro in SPSS was employed to analyse the effect of humble leadership on staff's attitudes towards error disclosure and the mediating effects of psychological safety and safety climate.

Results: Humble leadership had a positive influence on psychological safety (β 0.66, p<0.001) and safety climate (β 0.48, p<0.001). Furthermore, both psychological safety and safety climate significantly impacted staff's attitudes towards error disclosure (β 0.07, p<0.001; β 0.22, p<0.001, respectively). The study showed that humble leadership did not influence staff's attitudes towards error disclosure directly. Rather, the influence of humble leadership appears to be channelled through its positive effects on psychological safety and the safety climate.

Conclusion: Humble leadership fosters a safe environment and encourages a mindset of psychological safety among staff, which in turn leads to more positive attitudes towards error disclosure.

The importance of effective clinical leadership has been reflected in an increase in leadership development programmes. However, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the optimal structure, content and evaluation of such programmes. This review synthesised evidence from reviews of leadership development interventions for healthcare professionals published prior to October 2024, including content, methods, evaluation strategies and impact. Title, abstract and full-text screening were conducted in duplicate by two reviewers. Data extraction was piloted by two reviewers and conducted by a single reviewer. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool by a single reviewer, with generative artificial intelligence serving as the second reviewer. 86 systematic and non-systematic reviews met inclusion criteria. Regarding educational methods, leadership training effectiveness was associated with experiential learning, mixed-methods approaches, coaching or mentoring, longitudinal designs, goal-setting, and 360-degree feedback. Group learning and interprofessional education were noted for fostering teamwork. Programmes tailored to participants' needs and organisational contexts showed better outcomes. Content reported to be effective included interpersonal skills, self-awareness, emotional intelligence, leadership theory, communication and teamwork. Evaluations primarily relied on self-reported measures. Training outcomes were largely positive at the individual level, with participants reporting increased confidence and competence. Organisational and clinical outcomes were less frequently assessed. The long-term impact on patient outcomes and return on investment remains uncertain. Leadership development programmes were found to enhance individual competencies. However, evidence supporting long-term, system-wide impact remains limited due to reliance on self-reported evaluations and a lack of standardised evaluation approaches.

In the dynamic landscape of modern healthcare, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionising leadership roles by challenging established skill sets. Effective integration of AI relies heavily on adept balancing of rapid technological advances and ethical concerns, ensuring patient welfare and equitable access to care. In this context, strategies such as continuous learning, ethical prioritisation, leadership development and inclusive AI adoption are essential. By adopting a human-oriented approach, healthcare leaders can effectively harmonise technological progress and advance societal well-being.

The climate crisis presents a defining challenge for our generation, demanding leaders who can navigate the complexities of planetary health on an ailing planet while inspiring meaningful action across diverse sectors from public health to industry to government. Effective planetary health leadership requires a unique blend of attributes to identify and address the structural causes driving planetary crises, foster interdisciplinary collaboration and overcome the resistance that often accompanies transformative change. The authors represent the perspectives of three leaders in planetary health: CS, the medical director of a global planetary health education organisation, LP, the executive director of a national organisation which represents planetary health interests of >56 medical societies, and LC who chairs two committees under LP and works with CS. The ideas presented in this article result from several collaborative and iterative discussions among the authors who have worked together on prior projects. No patients were involved. Through this process, we identified seven key skills important in planetary health leadership. Resilience, emotional intelligence, creativity, interdisciplinary fluency, effective communication skills, lifelong learning, an unwavering commitment to equity and boldness are critical traits for leaders seeking to make a difference in this space. These seven attributes are for some innate but can and should also be cultivated among those aspiring to planetary health leadership. While no single individual can completely master all these qualities, and each of us is on a journey of growth and self-actualisation, this non-exhaustive list highlights key attributes that can foster the development of effective planetary health leaders. Next steps involve creating training programmes to foster the development of these important qualities.

Background: Effective healthcare leadership has been linked to improved individual and organisational outcomes globally. However, evaluations of healthcare leadership development programmes have often been of low quality. This study investigates the evaluation and decision-making needs of stakeholders for the Oxford Emerging Leaders Programme and aims to redesign its evaluation approach.

Methods: Drawing from Michael Quinn Patton's utilisation-focused evaluation approach, semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 key programme stakeholders. Interviews were thematically analysed to identify key areas for useful and impactful evaluation.

Results: Three main themes were identified: impact on patients, impact on healthcare organisations and individual outcomes. Individual outcomes were further divided into skills and qualities. Stakeholders emphasised the importance of measuring improvements in organisational culture, as well as from the perspectives of patients and individual leaders. The need for a multifaceted and longitudinal evaluation approach was highlighted.

Conclusions: The study underscores the importance of aligning evaluation methods with stakeholder needs. Tailoring evaluations to specific programme aims and incorporating both qualitative and quantitative measures can enhance their utility. These insights contribute to the broader literature on healthcare leadership development and programme evaluation.

Introduction: Black and minority ethnic (BME) workers within the National Health Service (NHS) experience barriers to attainment of senior leadership roles. The NHS Leadership Academy delivered two Leadership Programmes addressing barriers to progression among the BME workforce, the Stepping Up (middle managers) and Ready Now (senior leaders) programmes.

Methods: Mixed-methods evaluation involving an online survey (n=39; 20m/19f, identifying with 10 ethnic groups) and qualitative interviews (n=8; 5m/3f) with programme participants investigating barriers and the extent to which targeted leadership programmes impacted their career progression. Analysis included descriptive statistics and thematic analysis of qualitative data.

Results: Participants reported institutional barriers to career progression and experiences of structural racism. Evaluation of targeted leadership programmes was consistently positive, providing a 'safe space' for shared experiences, while building self-confidence and motivation to apply for career development opportunities or positions. Most participants secured meaningful career development following programme completion.

Conclusions: Targeted career development programmes are highly valued by BME healthcare workers and are perceived to contribute to addressing workforce inequalities in career progression relating to ethnic disparity in the attainment of senior NHS leadership roles. However, the broader impact of such programmes remains limited without addressing wider institutional barriers to progression and tackling racialised workplace inequities.