How do you resolve conflict with a physician in front of others?

Never do it alone but rather with another colleague or high administrator. Always take note of what was said in that moment. Be kind, no matter how you feel about this physician. Remember, no one is perfect.

Seek first to LISTEN and understand. Next assess and help to resolve. Difficult discussions need to be in private, honest and with perspectives of each side of an issue. Compromise often can work as long as ethics are not compromised as well.

I have the distinct advantage of being petite yet tenacious for the patient. Listening well w/o interrupting is truly a skill worth learning as is choosing kindness.

This situation may be addressed very professionally. The following are some key points to resolve this issue: 1: Stay Calm 2: Listen actively without any interruption and seek clarification. 3:Try to find a resolution on some common grounds 4: Be respectful, propose a solution, and follow afterward.

If the conflict with physician occurs while decisions are being made that effects patient care, it needs to be resolved soon. The physician can be pulled aside to discuss, avoiding confusion to patient and their family. If the conflict is not severe and does not effect patient care, it can be resolved in privacy at a later time, but needs to be resolved. This is a good way to bring both parties to discuss the issue, understand the facts that each has and resolve the issue soon. Most of the time, conflicts arise because of lack of information and communication gap. Having process in place ahead of time on how to resolve conflict at work place, will make it comfortable, and respectfully resolve the issue. Creating right culture is the key.

There are ways to have a conversation that doesn't involve conflict. I recommend that you maintain open and clear communication, establish mutual respect, and actively listen to each other's perspectives. It is important to approach the conversation with a positive attitude and a willingness to compromise when necessary. Additionally, setting clear goals and expectations and regularly checking in on progress can help prevent conflicts from arising.

In reflection of what healthcare means, organized provision of medical care, it is important to keep that in mind when responding. After having determined the cause through the assessment phase, it is imperative to remain professional. Look at all perspectives after assessing including one’s own action that may have precipitated the other persons actions. Keep the ego in check and understand the common goal. Agree collaboration is a necessity. Resolve quickly if in presence of others and revisit if needed at a later time removed from the situation.

In the unfortunate event that physicians are already engaged in a public conflict, it is important for both sides to remember that there is always two sides to a story, and so it is important to give the other physician the benefit of the doubt. They may have a perspective that you do not see or know about that is guiding their decisions. Be assertive about your opinions and the rationale for them, but make sure to also listen (out of respect) to the other person's opinions and seek to understand their point of view. The medical team is a team, so we all need to be on the same page for the sake of the patient. Conflict is an opportunity to practice humility, respect, and being a team player by bringing about conflict resolution.

None of us take everything into consideration. I prefer to bring up other options in a non-confrontational manner when possible. Such as..."What do you think about this diagnosis?" or "What do you think about this option?" or even, "How about this type of call rotation?" We're all in the same boat and there's no need to embarrass our colleagues. Discussions should be of the round table sort.

Multidisciplinary team members can effectively use the DEAR MAN technique from Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT). This approach, designed to maximize interpersonal effectiveness, translates into collaborative health care contexts. DEAR MAN stands for Describe, Express, Assert, Reinforce. Let’s visualize a scenario: A nurse disagrees with a physician’s treatment plan. Instead of a confrontational approach, the nurse calmly describes the situation (Describe), expresses concerns (say, re: patient safety) (Express), clearly states the preferred action (Assert), and reinforces the benefits of this action for the patient and team (Reinforce). The method not only smoothens the resolution process but also upholds respect and collaboration.

I agree with this except I would add that leaving your emotions out of the equation is professionally important and shows a level of maturity that most people never reach. When emotions are added to conversations, it raises the temperature of any situation. Emotions can cloud judgment and hinder effective communication. When emotions are involved, it can be difficult to think rationally and objectively, which can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts. By keeping emotions in check, individuals can focus on the facts and the issue at hand, leading to more productive and respectful conversations.

I agree, but sometimes for whatever reason, you may not be able to find common ground. During those times you may need to address later and involve other unbiased participants to give the outside looking in perspective.

My hospital uses the concept of “clarifying questions”, where anyone can raise a concern about patient care by beginning with: “I have a clarifying question…” (and then asking the question). While such a formal framework is easy to recognize (if not a bit rigid), the key is to ask questions. That’s often the best way to “confront” or “challenge” someone - especially someone in a position of authority. It gives them a chance to “save face” when changing their mind. In commercial air travel, questions are the way the co-pilot can best challenge the pilot - starting with open-ended questions and escalating to close-ended questions. And remember, a blatantly rhetorical question doesn’t count as a question!

Acceptance, in some situations, that conflict management is a process and may take more than a few steps/meetings is essential. It may even take weeks to months, depending on the context and sensitivity of the matter we are working on. Awareness that new information may emerge and having the flexibility to recalibrate is equally important. Fairness, 2-way communication, respect, and a neutral, unbiased, and supportive environment are necessities. Building diverse teams, including HR and investigating parties, with balanced gender and race representation, helps physicians feel supported and heard.

As the founder and director of The Center for Peer Review Justice ( www.peerReviewJustice.org), let me say simply: Don't. Do not directly confront a physician or another directly. Never, and I mean NEVER allow your words to embarrass anyone. And, I do not care who is "right". Your impulsivity can wait for a period of time when your concerns can be addressed privately and calmly. My career spans 23 long years of dealing with surgeons, physicians and other providers. I have a great deal of experience, and I hope wisdom. Take it or leave it. And, Good Luck.

What you do after a conflict is very important, because it has critical effect on the future health of the relationship and can serve as a stepping stone to deepening the relationship. Taking some time to reflect on the conflict, on what you could have done better and on what the other person did well and then communicating that to that person can yield big wins in restoring the relationship and in completely resolving the conflict.

You do not have a conflict with a Physician in front of others - it’s not a subject of debate, but of psychological reasoning. A physician’s practice is not just built on knowledge- it’s built on trust and patient doctor interaction. A public conflict can mitigate years of trust to a doubt in the mind of the onlooker - who may be a patient / attendant / or staff who can convey this non verbal communication about the physician. Clinical Conflicts have to be dealt in an objective manner under the wider purview of clinical governance, and other matters - in a closed room environment still but based on ‘patient’ listening to the cause of the conflict. Public conflicts do not help, infact they route the issue away from the root cause.

One thing that I have found helpful is to consider that most conflicts come from misaligned understanding of what is happening. In some cases, the situation needs a quick resolution and then time to process later. Sometimes it’s the physician didn’t know that something was a problem. Finally, I try my best to always start w the problem to solve (think: you and I both want to create the best patient experience, so let’s try… or is this the experience you had hoped to create?…) Starting with the question or problem first aligns w the physician mindset of problem solving. Great question.

Always create a follow up meeting, a few weeks later, when the smoke has cleared, assess the corrective actions, and whenever possible forgive.

Be direct but kind. If you can, cite your source (if needed). If you can do it in a way that a neutral third party can be around, that’s usually ideal.

Conflict is an opportunity for growth and improved communication, as it is a signal that the persons involved are not on the same page about a particular issue. Everyone should, thus, have a learner's mindset and humility and be quick to listen, quick to seek to understand, and quick to bridge the gap of understanding or in communication. First try to resolve conflicts privately, but don't hesitate to bring in other neutral party or someone both party respects if private resolution is ineffective or has escalated the conflict.