Workforce Engagement for Compassionate Advocacy, Resilience, and Empowerment (WE CARE): An Evidence-Based Wellness Program.

Poor well-being and burnout among the nursing workforce were heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to deliver, spread, and sustain an evidence-based wellness program, Workforce Engagement for Compassionate Advocacy, Resilience, and Empowerment (WE CARE), for nurse leaders, staff registered nurses (RNs), and patient care technicians (PCTs) to ameliorate or prevent burnout, promote resilience, and improve the work environment. The program included Community Resiliency Model (CRM) training provided by a certified 6-member wellness team. A baseline and 6-month follow-up survey included measures of well-being, moral distress, burnout, resilience, perceived organizational support (POS), job satisfaction, intent to leave (ITL), and work environment. A total of 4900 inpatient RNs, PCTs, and leaders of a 1207-bed academic medical center in the southeastern United States were analyzed. From baseline (n = 1533) to 6-month follow-up (n = 1457), well-being, moral distress, burnout, job satisfaction, and work environment improved; however, resilience, POS, and ITL did not. Although we have seen some improvements in well-being and mental health indicators, it is still early in the intervention period to have reached a critical mass with the training and other interventions. The mental health and work environment issues among nurses are so complex, no one-size-fits-all intervention can resolve.

Perceived stress from social isolation or loneliness among clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Workplace social isolation and loneliness have been found to result in a decline in job satisfaction and an increase in burnout among working individuals. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated feelings of loneliness and social isolation among healthcare workers. The majority of research on healthcare worker experiences is conducted in siloes which does not reflect the shared experiences of interprofessional teams. The purpose of this study is to understand stress from social isolation or loneliness across the entire clinical and non-clinical healthcare team over the course of the pandemic. METHODS: Data was acquired using a cross-sectional survey distributed to healthcare workers once a year at a large academic medical center in the Southeastern United States during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Information pertaining to job role, work location, and demographic factors was collected. Participants were also asked to assess individual well-being and resilience, in addition to reporting stress derived from various sources including job demands and social isolation or loneliness. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted to assess the association between stress from social isolation or loneliness and individual characteristics. RESULTS: Stress from social isolation or loneliness was found to decrease over the survey period across all measured variables. Trainees and physician-scientists were found to report the highest rates of this stressor compared to other job roles, while Hospital-Based ICU and Non-ICU work locations reported the highest rates of loneliness and social isolation stress. Younger workers and individuals from marginalized gender and racial groups were at greater risk for stress from social isolation or loneliness. CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of social connections for well-being and job performance, organizations have a responsibility to create conditions and mechanisms to foster social connections. This includes establishing and reinforcing norms of behavior, and developing connection mechanisms, particularly for groups at high risk of loneliness and social isolation.

Don't Go: Examining the Relationships Between Meaning, Work Environment and Turnover Intention Across the Entire Healthcare Team.

Introduction: Healthcare workers tend to have a strong sense of altruism in their work, which may be protective against turnover despite poor working conditions. Due to the increased distress noted during the pandemic, the challenges of working in healthcare and changing attitudes about work may have surpassed the protective effect of meaning and purpose in work. This study empirically examines perceived meaning in work, and specific work-related factors that contribute to employees' intent to stay and to recommend working at the organization to others as COVID-19 transitions from a pandemic to endemic phase. Methods: Data from a survey of 4451 clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers were analyzed using regression and dominance analyses to identify specific predictors of turnover intention and net promoter score. Results: The variables that explained the greatest contribution to variance in turnover intention from highest to lowest were burnout, trust and confidence in senior leadership, perceived organizational support, sense of belonging, and sense of recognition. The variables that explained the greatest overall contribution to variance for net promoter score from highest to lowest were perceived organizational support, trust and confidence in senior leadership, resource availability, sense of recognition, and sense of belonging. While meaning in work was associated with turnover intent, organizational and team level factors such as trust and belonging were more predictive of the outcomes. Discussion: While meaning and purpose are important job resources, they are not sufficient to retain employees in the absence of trust, organizational support, belonging, recognition and access to necessary resources. Leaders must seek to foster environments that support trust, belonging and recognition in their retention efforts.

Exploring National Trends and Organizational Predictors of Violence and Mistreatment From Patients and Visitors.

GOAL: Rising incidents of violence and mistreatment of healthcare workers by patients and visitors have been reported. U.S. healthcare workers are five times more likely to experience nonfatal workplace violence (WPV) than workers in any other profession. However, less is known about the national trends in the incidence of violence and mistreatment in healthcare. The specific organizational and individual-level factors that relate to stress arising from these occurrences specifically by patients and family members are also not fully understood. The goals of this study were to examine national trends of violence toward healthcare workers, understand which populations are most vulnerable to stress from violence and mistreatment, and explore organizational factors that are related to these occurrences. METHODS: Data were collected from three sources: (1) The Bureau of Labor Statistics Intentional Injury by Another Person data for the period 2011-2020, (2) data from a large national workers' compensation claim services provider for the period 2018-2022, and (3) results from a survey distributed at a large medical center in June and July 2022. Data were represented graphically and analyzed using multivariate regression and dominance analysis to identify specific predictors of WPV and mistreatment among healthcare workers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of the total surveyed sample, 23.7% of participants reported mistreatment from patients or visitors as a major stressor and 14.6% reported WPV from patients or visitors as a major stressor. Stress from mistreatment and WPV was most frequently reported by nurses, employees aged 18 to 24 years other than nurses, those who identified as White, and those who identified as female or a gender minority. The emergency room (ER) showed the highest percentages of stress from mistreatment (61.8%) and violence (55.9%) from patients or visitors. The top predictors of stress from WPV and mistreatment by patients or visitors among healthcare workers ranked high to low were working in the ER, working as a nurse, a lack of necessary supplies or equipment, patient or visitor attitudes or beliefs about COVID-19, and working in a hospital-based unit. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: In addition to protecting employees as a moral imperative, preventing WPV is critical for organizational performance. Employee productivity is estimated to decrease up to 50% in the 6 to 18 weeks following an incident of violence, while turnover can increase 30% to 40%. An effective WPV prevention plan and a proactive approach to supporting the physical and mental health conditions that may result from WPV can mitigate the potential costs and exposures from these incidents. Organizations must also set clear expectations of behavior with patients and visitors by refusing to tolerate violence and mistreatment of caregivers. The impact of WPV can remain present and active for up to 8 years following an incident. Policy-level interventions are also needed. Currently, there are no federal protections for healthcare workers related to violence, though some states have made it a felony to abuse healthcare workers.

Burnout, Moral Distress, and Compassion Fatigue as Correlates of Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms in Clinical and Nonclinical Healthcare Workers.

GOAL: Research has highlighted psychological distress resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers (HCWs), including the development of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). However, the degree to which these conditions have endured beyond the pandemic and the extent to which they affect the entire healthcare team, including both clinical and nonclinical workers, remain unknown. This study aims to identify correlates of PTSS in the entire healthcare workforce with the goal of providing evidence to support the development of trauma-informed leadership strategies. METHODS: Data were collected from June to July 2022 using a cross-sectional anonymous survey in a large academic medical center setting. A total of 6,466 clinical and nonclinical employees completed the survey (27.3% response rate). Cases with at least one missing variable were omitted, for a total sample size of 4,806, the evaluation of which enabled us to understand individual, organizational, and work-related and nonwork-related stressors associated with PTSS. Data were analyzed using ordinal logistic regression and dominance analyses to identify predictors of PTSS specific to clinical and nonclinical workers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: While previous studies have shown that HCWs in different job roles experience unique stressors, our data indicate that the top correlates of PTSS among both clinical and nonclinical HCWs are the same: burnout, moral distress, and compassion fatigue. These three factors alone explained 45% and 44.4% of the variance in PTSS in clinical and nonclinical workers, respectively. PTSS was also associated with a lower sense of recognition and feeling mistreated by other employees at work in the clinical workforce. Concerningly, women and sexual minorities in the clinical sample exhibited a higher incidence of PTSS. In nonclinical workers, social isolation or loneliness and lower trust and confidence in senior leadership were associated with PTSS. Nonwork-related factors, such as exhaustion from caregiving responsibilities and financial strain, were also significantly associated with PTSS. Even after controlling for discrimination at and outside of work in both samples, we found that non-White populations were more likely to experience PTSS, highlighting a deeply concerning issue in the healthcare workforce. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The primary objective of this article is to help healthcare leaders understand the correlates of PTSS across the entire healthcare team as organizations recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding which factors are associated with PTSS will help healthcare leaders develop best practices that aim to reduce HCW distress and strategies to circumvent trauma derived from future crises. Our data indicate that leaders must address the correlates of PTSS in the workforce, focusing attention on both those who work on the frontlines and those who work behind the scenes. We urge leaders to adopt a trauma-informed leadership approach to ensure that the entire healthcare workforce is recognized, supported, and cared for as each HCW plays a unique role in the care of patients.

Still Exhausted: The Role of Residual Caregiving Fatigue on Women in Medicine and Science Across the Pipeline.

Understanding the impact of caregiving responsibilities on women in medicine is crucial for ensuring a healthy and intact workforce, as caregiving responsibilities have the potential to affect the careers of women in health care along the entire pipeline, from students and trainees to physicians, physician-scientists, and biomedical researchers.

Feeling safe versus being safe: Perceptions of safety versus actual disease exposure across the entire health care team.

As supply chains experienced disruptions early in the COVID-19 pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) quickly became scarce. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of perceptions of inadequate PPE, fear of COVID-19 infection, and self-reported direct COVID-19 exposure on health care workers. Data to assess distress, resilience, social-ecological factors, and work and nonwork-related stressors were collected from June to July 2020 at a large medical center. Stressors were analyzed by role using descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analysis. Our data indicate that job role influenced fear of infection and perceptions of inadequate PPE in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Perceived organizational support was also related to perceptions of inadequate PPE supply. Interestingly, work location, rather than job role, was predictive of direct COVID-19 exposure. Our data highlight a disconnect between the perception of safety in the health care setting with real risk of exposure to infectious disease. This study suggests that leaders in health care should focus on cultivating supportive organizational cultures, assessing both perceived and actual safety, and provide adequate training in safety practices may improve preparedness and organizational trust during times of both certainty and crisis particularly for clinical workers with less education and training.

An Investigation of Organizational Correlates of Distress in Non-Clinician Biomedical Researchers in the United States.

Purpose: Challenges ushered by the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increased focus on the mental well-being of the healthcare workforce. Despite the important contribution non-clinician biomedical researchers make to the mission of academic medical centers, the well-being of this unique population remains understudied in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the individual and organizational correlates of distress among non-clinician biomedical researchers. Methods: A survey was delivered to employees of a large academic medical center in the southeastern United States, including non-clinician biomedical researchers. Participants were asked to assess their own well-being using the validated Well-Being Index (WBI) tool, resilience, work and nonwork-related stressors and demographic descriptors. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of increased odds of overall distress. Results: Nearly 44% of surveyed non-clinician biomedical researchers met the threshold for high distress which indicates an increased risk of suicidal ideation, turnover intention, and burnout. The major correlates of distress were at the organizational level, including perceived organizational support (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.90), heavy workload and long hours (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.53-6.88), inability or lack of support to take time off (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.03-7.66) and conflict with supervisor (OR 5.03, 95% CI 1.13-22.1). While lower individual resilience (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.88) was statistically significantly associated with greater distress, it accounted for less than 10% of the overall variance when controlling for other work-related factors. Conclusion: These findings suggest that developing organizational interventions that address institutional support for non-clinician biomedical researchers within academic medical centers represents an important opportunity to reduce distress within this population. While emphasizing individual resiliency as an important in the pursuit of well-being, it is also the responsibility of the organization to create and foster an environment in which employees can access their own resilience.

Physician, Nurse, and Advanced Practice Provider Perspectives on the Rapid Transition to Inpatient and Outpatient Telemedicine.

Background: Many health systems transitioned rapidly to using inpatient and outpatient telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior research has examined clinician satisfaction and experiences with telemedicine in a siloed approach for specific provider types. Less is known about how experiences with the rapid transition to telemedicine affected the entire clinical team, and how this contributed to their overall distress. Methods: A survey was conducted within a large academic medical center in the Southeastern United States during June of 2020. The survey asked about experiences with inpatient and outpatient telemedicine and overall distress. Analysis of variance was calculated to examine differences in experiences among physicians, nurses, and advanced practice providers (APPs) with both inpatient and outpatient telemedicine. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to determine whether reported telemedicine stressors were associated with changes in overall distress scores. Qualitative comments provided during the survey were included to illustrate the quantitative findings. Results: Of the 1130 survey respondents, 237 indicated that they used telemedicine. Telemedicine use was not statistically significantly associated with overall distress scores. The APPs indicated the greatest satisfaction with telemedicine, followed by physicians and then nurses. Team members differed on their perceptions of quality of care and safety for inpatient and outpatient telemedicine. Physicians (70%) and APPs (64%) felt safer having the option to use inpatient telemedicine, whereas only 26% of nurses reported the same. Overall, >70% of physicians and APPs would like to continue having the option to use inpatient and outpatient telemedicine in the future, whereas <50% of nurses reported the same. Discussion: These results suggest that telemedicine holds promise for providing care beyond the pandemic, and it may be a mechanism to improve flexibility, autonomy, and expand patient access. Implementation of new technologies must consider the experiences of the entire team, rather than a siloed approach to determining satisfaction with the changes.

Environmental and organizational correlates and motivations for provider-sponsored health plan ownership in the post-reform era.

BACKGROUND: The 1980s to 1990s saw many health systems in the United States enter and exit the insurance market in the form of provider-sponsored health plans (PSHPs). Reforms and value-based reimbursement methods have stimulated health care organizations to reconsider PSHP as a logical strategy. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine market and organizational factors associated with PSHP ownership and motivations for engaging in PSHP after health care reforms. The resource dependence theory was used as a theoretical lens. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A sequential quantitative to qualitative mixed-methods design was used. The quantitative analysis examined data for 5,849 U.S. hospitals. Results were synthesized with qualitative findings from 10 semistructured interviews representing eight health systems in five states. RESULTS: Organizational and environmental characteristics were significantly associated with PSHP ownership. Hospital and payer concentration, Medicare penetration, income, unemployment rate, government, and for-profit and metro area hospitals were associated with a lower likelihood of PSHP ownership. Salaried physician arrangements, clinically integrated network membership and adoption of other risk-bearing arrangements were associated with higher odds of PSHP ownership. Interviewees described PSHP as the culmination of the journey to value-based care and as a strategy to improve patient care, compete, and diversify revenue streams. CONCLUSIONS: Both market and organizational factors are important considerations for hospitals contemplating PSHP ownership, and motivations for ownership cover a broad range of financial, competitive, strategic, and mission-based goals. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Hospitals considering PSHP ownership must carefully evaluate their competitive landscapes and organizational resources to ensure optimal conditions for this strategy. PSHP ownership has high start-up costs and requires a long-term organizational commitment.

Healthcare is a Team Sport: Stress, Resilience, and Correlates of Well-Being Among Health System Employees in a Crisis.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: While the COVID-19 pandemic has added stressors to the lives of healthcare workers, it is unclear which factors represent the most useful targets for interventions to mitigate employee distress across the entire healthcare team. A survey was distributed to employees of a large healthcare system in the Southeastern United States, and 1,130 respondents participated. The survey measured overall distress using the 9-item Well-Being Index (WBI), work-related factors, moral distress, resilience, and organizational-level factors. Respondents were also asked to identify major work, clinical, and nonwork stressors. Multivariate regression was used to evaluate associations between employee characteristics and WBI distress score. Overall, 82% of employees reported high distress (WBI ≥ 2), with nurses, clinical support staff, and advanced practice providers reporting the highest average scores. Factors associated with higher distress included increased job demands or responsibilities, heavy workload or long hours, higher frequency of moral distress, and loneliness or social isolation. Factors associated with lower distress were perceived organizational support, work control, perceived fairness of salary cuts, and resilience. Most factors significantly associated with distress-heavy workloads and long hours, increased job demands, and moral distress, in particular-were work-related, indicating that efforts can be made to mitigate them. Resilience explained a small portion of the variance in distress relative to other work-related factors. Ensuring appropriate staffing levels may represent the single largest opportunity to significantly move the needle on distress. However, the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare system may represent a barrier to addressing these stressors.

Journal rankings and directions for future research in health care management: A global perspective.

Despite the increasingly global nature of health care, much of the research about journal rankings and directions for future research in health care management is from a United States based viewpoint. There is a lack of information about influential journals and trends for health care management research from a global perspective. This exploratory study gathered the opinions of health care management researchers from 17 countries regarding which journals are considered most influential, popular research topics and areas needing more attention from the research community. An online survey was sent to individuals in high-income Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries who were identified through author relationships, academic institution websites, editorial boards of international journals, and academic and practitioner associations in the countries of interest. Results indicate that journal rankings vary substantially from prior published studies evaluating health care management journals and international ranking lists, and the list of influential journals includes a much more diverse array of publications. Respondents also indicated a diverse number of topics for current and future research, highlighting the global complexity of the field. The implications of this study are valuable to scholars evaluating outlets for disseminating research, and highlighting areas for collaborative research in health care management globally.