Radiography (London, England : 1995) · 2026
Quiet quitting in radiography: A narrative review of causes, consequences, and solutions.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chandler H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To explore the concept of "quiet quitting" and examine its relevance to diagnostic radiography, including contributing factors, manifestations, and potential impacts on workforce sustainability and service delivery.
KEY FINDINGS: Quiet quitting, defined as reduced discretionary effort while remaining in post, is increasingly recognised across healthcare but remains underexplored in radiography. Evidence suggests it is closely associated with burnout, moral injury, workforce shortages, and insufficient organisational support. In radiography, it may manifest as adherence strictly to contracted hours, reduced uptake of overtime, and limited engagement in continuing professional development. Contributing factors include post-pandemic fatigue, escalating service demand, staffing pressures, work-life imbalance, and dissatisfaction with career development opportunities. These behaviours may negatively affect service capacity, increase waiting times, and impact team morale, patient safety, and student learning experiences.
CONCLUSION: Quiet quitting represents a meaningful and emerging challenge within the radiography workforce. It reflects wider systemic pressures rather than individual disengagement alone, signalling unmet workforce needs and organisational shortcomings.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Addressing quiet quitting requires proactive and supportive leadership, investment in workforce wellbeing, and clear strategies to enhance engagement. Priorities include protected time for professional development, improved staffing and workload management, and fostering a positive workplace culture. Recognising and responding to early signs of disengagement may support staff retention, improve morale, and maintain high-quality patient care.
KEY FINDINGS: Quiet quitting, defined as reduced discretionary effort while remaining in post, is increasingly recognised across healthcare but remains underexplored in radiography. Evidence suggests it is closely associated with burnout, moral injury, workforce shortages, and insufficient organisational support. In radiography, it may manifest as adherence strictly to contracted hours, reduced uptake of overtime, and limited engagement in continuing professional development. Contributing factors include post-pandemic fatigue, escalating service demand, staffing pressures, work-life imbalance, and dissatisfaction with career development opportunities. These behaviours may negatively affect service capacity, increase waiting times, and impact team morale, patient safety, and student learning experiences.
CONCLUSION: Quiet quitting represents a meaningful and emerging challenge within the radiography workforce. It reflects wider systemic pressures rather than individual disengagement alone, signalling unmet workforce needs and organisational shortcomings.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Addressing quiet quitting requires proactive and supportive leadership, investment in workforce wellbeing, and clear strategies to enhance engagement. Priorities include protected time for professional development, improved staffing and workload management, and fostering a positive workplace culture. Recognising and responding to early signs of disengagement may support staff retention, improve morale, and maintain high-quality patient care.