A double-edged sword: The effects of social network ties on job satisfaction in primary care organizations.

BACKGROUND: Social ties between health care workers may be an important driver of job satisfaction; however, research on this topic is limited. PURPOSE: We used social network methods to collect data describing two types of social ties, (a) instrumental ties (i.e., exchange of advice that enables work) and (b) expressive ties (i.e., exchange of social support), and related those ties to workers' job satisfaction. METHODOLOGY: We surveyed 456 clinicians and staff at 23 primary care practices about their social networks and workplace attitudes. We used multivariable linear regression to estimate the relationship between an individual's job satisfaction and two network properties: (a) eigenvector centrality (a measure of the importance of an individual in a network) and (b) ego network density (a measure of the cohesiveness of an individual's network). We examined this relationship for both instrumental and expressive ties. RESULTS: Individuals who were more central in the expressive network were less satisfied in their job, b = -0.40 (0.19), p < .05, whereas individuals who had denser instrumental networks were more satisfied in their job, b = 0.49 (0.21), p < .05. CONCLUSION: Workplace relationships affect worker well-being. Centrality in an expressive network may require greater emotional labor, increasing workers' risk for job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, a dense instrumental network may promote job satisfaction by strengthening workers' access to full information, supporting competence and confidence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Efforts to increase job satisfaction should consider both the positive and negative effects of social networks on workers' sense of well-being.

Association of Implementation and Social Network Factors With Patient Safety Culture in Medical Homes: A Coincidence Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) may provide a key model for ambulatory patient safety. Our objective was to explore which PCMH and patient safety implementation and social network factors may be necessary or sufficient for higher patient safety culture. METHODS: This was a cross-case analysis study in 25 diverse U.S. PCMHs. Data sources included interviews of a clinician and an administrator in each PCMH, surveys of clinicians and staff, and existing data on the PCMHs' characteristics. We used coincidence analysis, a novel method based on set theory and Boolean logic, to evaluate relationships between factors and the implementation outcome of patient safety culture. RESULTS: The coincidence analysis identified 5 equally parsimonious solutions (4 factors), accounting for all practices with higher safety culture. Three solutions contained the same core minimally sufficient condition: the implementation factor leadership priority for patient safety and the social network factor reciprocity in advice-seeking network ties (advice-seeking relationships). This minimally sufficient condition had the highest coverage (5/7 practices scoring higher on the outcome) and best performance across solutions; all included leadership priority for patient safety. Other key factors included self-efficacy and job satisfaction and quality improvement climate. The most common factor whose absence was associated with the outcome was a well-functioning process for behavioral health. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that PCMH safety culture is higher when clinicians and staff perceive that leadership prioritizes patient safety and when high reciprocity among staff exists. Interventions to improve patient safety should consider measuring and addressing these key factors.

The Johns Hopkins Primary Care for Cancer Survivor Clinic: lessons learned in our first 4 years.

PURPOSE: We established the Primary Care for Cancer Survivor (PCCS) Clinic in 2015 to address transition and care delivery challenges unique to cancer survivors. We describe the clinical program, detail patients from the first 4 years of implementation, and discuss lessons learned during the process. METHODS: We abstracted relevant patient information from the electronic medical record, administered a needs assessment survey at initial visits, and collected relative value unit (RVU) data. RESULTS: Between August 2015 and May 2019, we saw 230 PCCS patients with an increasing number of referrals yearly; nearly half were breast cancer survivors. At the initial visit, patients reported a median of 9 needs, with emotional needs most prevalent; over a third received at least one referral. PCCS patients generated higher billing codes and average RVUs compared with general patients. CONCLUSIONS: In its first 4 years, the PCCS program has thrived as a unique model of cancer survivorship centered in primary care. PCCS patients reported numerous needs, emphasizing the critical need for a multi-disciplinary approach in this population. With increasing referrals, we have considered different risk stratification and staffing models for capacity and expansion. By generating more RVUs per visit compared with the general clinic, PCCS has demonstrated financial sustainability. Buy-in from our oncology colleagues, divisional support from general medicine, along with our collaboration of like-minded internists have allowed us to be a robust program. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Models of survivorship care embedded in primary care can provide meaningful, patient-centered care for cancer survivors.