Table 1 General characteristic of studies
No | Title | Author (year) | Study design | Study Location | Study Population (Total Sample) | Survey method | Survey instrument |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.. | Workplace violence against medical staff in healthcare facilities in Barbados [19] | Abed et al. (2016) | Cross-sectional | Barbados | 141 Respondents: Nurses, doctors (72% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire |
2. | Aggression towards the GP: Can we profile the GP-victim? A cross-sectional survey among GPs [20] | Demeur et al. (2018) | Cross-sectional | Belgium | 246 General practitioners (GPs) (67% response rate) | Online survey | Validated Likert scale questionnaire consisting of socio-demographic background details, questions related to violence and harassment (developed based on a literature review) and the “Big Five personality traits” questionnaire |
3. | Violence in general practice: A gendered risk? [21] | Elston and Gabe (2016) | Mixed method | England | 697 GPs (62% response rate) 32 GPs | Self-administered survey In-depth interview, focus group discussion | Data were mainly drawn from a UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)-funded study of violence against professionals in the community Semi-structured questionnaire developed based on a literature review of previous research and policy documents and following feminist researchers’ critique of conventional criminology, querying the characteristics of violence, the context for the most recent incidents of violence, practice organisation and environment, and GPs. Biographical backgrounds were also collected, and how they managed the risk of violence and attempted to minimise possible harm |
4. | Prevalence and risk factors associated with workplace violence against general practitioners in Hubei, China [22] | Gan et al. (2018) | Cross-sectional | China | 1015 GPs (86% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Chinese version of the Workplace Violence Scale developed by Wang et al. 2006, which consists of five sub-sections related to social background and work-related factors |
5. | Violence towards personnel in out-of-hours primary care: A cross-sectional study [23] | Joa and Morken (2012) | Cross-sectional | Norway | 536 Respondents: Physicians, nurses, others (75% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Australian questionnaire on occupational violence among GPs that consists of a few sections of the core study domains, such as individual work-related factors |
6. | Primary care clinician and clinic director experiences of professional bias, harassment, and discrimination in an underserved agricultural region of California [24] | Ko and Dorri (2019) | Qualitative | USA | 26 Respondents: Primary care clinicians and clinic directors | In-depth interview | Interview session guided by an open-ended questionnaire on challenges, strategies, and personal journeys during practice |
7. | Users’ perception of violence and conflicts with professionals in primary care centers before and during COVID-19. A qualitative study [25] | Pina et al. (2022) | Qualitative | Spain | 80 Respondents: Primary care services users | Focus group discussion | Semi-structured questionnaire to evaluate conflicts between users and professionals in primary care (regarding organisational aspects, HCWs’ weaknesses, and users’ attitudes/behaviours) during COVID-19 |
8. | Sources of conflict and prevention proposals in user violence towards primary care staff: A qualitative study of the perception of professionals [26] | Pina et al. (2022) | Qualitative | Spain | 44 Respondents: HCW of primary care services (miscellaneous) | Focus group discussion | Semi-structured questionnaire to evaluate conflicts between users and professionals in primary care (regarding organisational aspects, HCWs’ weaknesses, and users' attitudes/behaviours) during COVID-19 |
9. | Workplace violence types in family health, offenders, reactions, and problems experienced [27] | Sturbelle et al. (2020) | Mixed method | Brazil | Phase 1: 106 Respondents: Miscellaneous (response rate: not available [NA]) Phase 2: 18 Victims | Phase 1: In-depth interview Phase 2: Self-administered survey | Phase 1 (Quantitative) Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire Phase 2 (Qualitative) Semi-structured open-ended questionnaire querying potential WPV among professionals who work in the Family Health Unit (FHU) that determined that the work conditions and organisation influence these problems |
10. | Aggression and violence against primary care physicians—A nationwide questionnaire survey [28] | Vorderwülbecke et al. (2015) | Cross-sectional | Germany | 831 GPs (59% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Validated questionnaire adapted from original questionnaires (international sources) |
11. | Organizational safety climate and workplace violence among primary healthcare workers in Malaysia [29] | Rajakrishnan et al. (2022) | Cross-sectional | Malaysia | 838 Respondents: Miscellaneous (83% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Validated questionnaire consisting of two main sections: WPV (WHO–ILO) and organisational safety climate (OSC, NOSACQ-50) to elicit information on OSC |
12. | Violence against health workers in family medicine centers [30] | Al-Turki et al. (2016) | Cross-sectional | Saudi Arabia | 270 Respondents: Miscellaneous (response rate: NA) | Self-administered survey | Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire |
13. | Violence against healthcare workers at primary care centers in Dammam and Al Khobar, Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia, 2019 [13] | Alsmael et al. (2020) | Cross-sectional | Saudi Arabia | 360 Respondents: Miscellaneous (64% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire |
14. | The impact of patient aggression on community pharmacists: A critical incident study [31] | Irwin et al. (2013) | Qualitative | Scotland | 18 Pharmacists | In-depth interview | Semi-structured open-ended questionnaire with three main focuses: recount memory of incidents encountered, query of the general causes of patient aggression, and the supportive actions and use of preventive measures/damage controls |
15. | Frequency and forms of workplace violence in primary health care [32] | Jatic et al. (2019) | Cross-sectional | Bosnia | 558 Respondents: Medical doctors, nurses (57% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Validated questionnaire consisting of seven topics: socio-demographics, individual working characteristics, type of violence, consequences of violence, mental disorders associated with WPV, reaction to the violence, and education on preventive measures |
16. | How the medical culture contributes to coworker-perpetrated harassment and abuse of family physicians [33] | Miedema et al. (2012) | Mixed method | Canada | Phase 1: 3802 GPs (response rate: NA) Phase 2: 41 GPs | Self-administered survey Telephone and in-person interviews | Survey package consisting of a questionnaire and a card with a request for an interview with participants Semi-structured open-ended questionnaire querying the challenges during practice |
17. | Aggressions towards primary health care workers in Madrid, Spain, 2011–2012 [34] | Toro et al. (2015) | Cross-sectional | Spain | 11,525 Respondents: Miscellaneous | Secondary data | Study data were extracted from the notification survey system used by the Madrid Health System to report events of violence or aggression at primary care centres |
18. | User violence and psychological well-being in primary health-care professionals [35] | Cecilia et al. (2017) | Cross-sectional | Spain | 574 Respondents: Doctors, nursing staff, non-health staff (response rate: NA) | Self-administered survey | Validated questionnaire consisting of the following sections: Healthcare Workers’ Aggressive Behaviour Scale-Users–Primary Healthcare Version (HABS–U-PHC), Goldberg’s General Health Questionnaire, overall job satisfaction (OJS), and the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) |
19. | Encouraging employees to report verbal violence in primary health care in Serbia: A cross-sectional study [36] | Marina et al. (2017) 2017 | Cross-sectional | Serbia | 1526 Respondents: Physicians, nurses (86.8% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire |
20. | Does workplace violence exist in primary health care? Evidence from Serbia [37] | Marina et al. (2015) | Cross-sectional | Serbia | 1526 Respondents: Physicians, nurses (87% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Modified version of the standard WHO WPV questionnaire |
21. | Assessment of non-physical user violence and burnout in primary health care professionals. The modulating role of job satisfaction [38] | David Pina et al. (2022) | Cross-sectional | Spain | 574 Respondents: Medical staff, nursing staff, support personnel (80.60% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Validated questionnaire consisting of four sections: Socio-demographic details, HABS–U-PHC, OJS, and the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MSI-GS) |
22. | Prevalence and associated factors for workplace violence among general practitioners in China: A national cross-sectional study [39] | Feng et al. (2022) | Cross-sectional | China | 4376 GPs (95% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Chinese version of the Workplace Violence Scale developed by Wang et al. 2006 |
23. | Physician–nurse conflict resolution styles in primary health care [40] | Delak and Širok (2018) | Cross-sectional | Slovenia | 298 Respondents: 173 nurses, 125 physicians (49% response rate) | Self-administered survey | Thomas–Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument |