Hospital Physicians' Perspectives on Occupational Stress During COVID-19: a Qualitative Analysis from Two US Cities.

BACKGROUND: US physicians are at risk for high rates of occupational stress and burnout, which the COVID-19 pandemic has intensified. As approaches targeting physicians' individual resilience have fallen short, researchers are increasingly calling for studies that investigate organizational drivers of stress and burnout. OBJECTIVE: To understand the multi-dimensional systems factors shaping hospital physicians' occupational stress during the pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews conducted in February-October 2021. SETTING: Hospitals in New York City and New Orleans. PARTICIPANTS: A purposive snowball sample of attending physicians and fellows in hospital medicine, emergency medicine, pulmonary critical care, and palliative care who spent at least 4 weeks providing inpatient COVID-19 care beginning in March 2020 was selected. The sample included 40 physicians from 14 hospitals in New York City and 39 physicians from nine hospitals in New Orleans. APPROACH: Descriptive analysis of participants' self-reported perceptions of occupational stress. KEY RESULTS: Participants identified multiple factors shaping their occupational stress including individual-level factors such as age, work experience, and life stage; institutional-level factors such as resource disparities, institutional type and size, and policies; professional-level factors such as informal rationing and medical uncertainty; and societal-level factors such as the federal response, COVID politics, and social inequalities. Stressors within and across these four levels worked in combination to shape physicians' perceptions of occupational stress at the individual level. CONCLUSIONS: This article contributes to an emergent literature on systems-based approaches to occupational stress and burnout among physicians by demonstrating the intersections among societal conditions, professional cultures, institutional work environments, and individual stress. Findings from semi-structured interviews suggest that interventions to reduce physician stress and burnout may be more effective if they target systems factors and stressors at multiple levels.

Moral Stress and Moral Distress: Confronting Challenges in Healthcare Systems under Pressure.

Stresses on healthcare systems and moral distress among clinicians are urgent, intertwined bioethical problems in contemporary healthcare. Yet conceptualizations of moral distress in bioethical inquiry often overlook a range of routine threats to professional integrity in healthcare work. Using examples from our research on frontline physicians working during the COVID-19 pandemic, this article clarifies conceptual distinctions between moral distress, moral injury, and moral stress and illustrates how these concepts operate together in healthcare work. Drawing from the philosophy of healthcare, we explain how moral stress results from the normal operations of overstressed systems; unlike moral distress and moral injury, it may not involve a sense of powerlessness concerning patient care. The analysis of moral stress directs attention beyond the individual, to stress-generating systemic factors. We conclude by reflecting on how and why this conceptual clarity matters for improving clinicians' professional wellbeing, and offer preliminary pathways for intervention.

Multidimensional stressors and protective factors shaping physicians' work environments and work-related well-being in two large US cities during COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Clinician burnout and poor work-related well-being reached a critical inflection point during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article applies a novel conceptual model informed by the Total Worker Health® approach to identify and describe multilevel stressors and protective factors that affected frontline physicians' work environments and work-related well-being. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of hospital-based physicians from multiple hospital types in Los Angeles and Miami who cared for COVID-19 patients. Semistructured interviews lasting 60-90 min were conducted over Zoom. Interview transcripts were thematically coded using Dedoose qualitative software. RESULTS: The final sample of 66 physicians worked in 20 hospitals. Stressors in the social, political, and economic environment included dealing with the politicization of COVID-19, including vaccine hesitancy; state and federal governmental COVID-19 policies and messaging; and shifting CDC guidance. Employment and labor pattern stressors included the national nursing shortage, different policies for paid time off, furloughs, reduced pay, and layoffs. Organizational-level stressors included institutional policies, staffing constraints and high patient volume (i.e., increased number of cases and longer lengths of stay), and perceived poor leadership. At the individual worker level, stressors included concerns about viral transmission to family, strained personal relationships, and work-life fit, particularly for those with young children. Respondents identified promising protective factors at multiple levels, including responsive state leadership, job security, concrete opportunities to provide input into institutional policy, strong leadership and communication, and feeling cared for by one's institution. CONCLUSION: Findings support a multi-level strategy that acknowledges internal organizational and external factors shaping clinicians' work-related well-being, consistent with the Total Worker Health® approach.

Firearm laws and the network of firearm movement among US states.

BACKGROUND: The movement of firearm across state lines may decrease the effectiveness of state-level firearm laws. Yet, how state-level firearm policies affect cross-state movement have not yet been widely explored. This study aims to characterize the interstate movement of firearms and its relationship with state-level firearm policies. METHODS: We analyzed the network of interstate firearm movement using Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives firearm trace data (2010-2017). We constructed the network of firearm movement between 50 states. We used zero-inflated negative binomial regression to estimate the relationship between the number of a state's firearm laws and number of states for which it was the source of 100 or more firearms, adjusting for state characteristics. We used a similar model to examine the relationship between firearm laws and the number of states for which a given state was the destination of 100 or more firearms. RESULTS: Over the 8-year period, states had an average of 26 (Standard Deviation [SD] 25.2) firearm laws. On average, a state was the source of 100 or more crime-related firearms for 2.2 (SD 2.7) states and was the destination of 100 or more crime-related firearms for 2.2 (SD 3.4) states. Greater number of firearm laws was associated with states being the source of 100 or more firearms to fewer states (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] 0.58 per SD, p < 0.001) and being the destination of 100 or more firearms from more states (IRR1.73 per SD, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Restrictive state-level firearm policies are associated with less movement of firearms to other states, but with more movement of firearms from outside states. The effectiveness of state-level firearm-restricting laws is complicated by a network of interstate firearm movement.

Longitudinal Associations Between Healthcare Resources, Policy, and Firearm-Related Suicide and Homicide from 2012 to 2016.

BACKGROUND: Firearm-related violence is a leading cause of mortality in the United States (US). Prior research suggests that public policy plays a role in firearm mortality, but the role of healthcare resources (physicians, insurance coverage) within the US policy context has not yet been studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine how healthcare resources and social/firearm policy affect firearm-related suicide and homicide rates in the US. DESIGN: Longitudinal, ecological study. SETTING: US. PARTICIPANTS: US states from 2012 to 2016 (N = 242). MEASUREMENT: The outcome variables were age-adjusted, firearm-related suicide and homicide rates. Predictor variables were healthcare resources (physicians, Medicaid benefits generosity) and policy context (social policy, firearm policy) with covariates for sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: Healthcare provider variables did not have significant associations to firearm-related suicide or homicide. In fully saturated models, more worker protection laws, greater average population density, more alcohol regulation, and more firearm prohibition policies were associated with fewer firearm-related suicides. Higher generosity of Medicaid benefits was associated with fewer firearm-related homicides. Poverty rate was a predictor of both outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This state-level study cannot make individual-level inferences. Only proxy variables were available for measuring gun ownership and actual gun ownership rates may not have been ideally captured at the state level. CONCLUSIONS: At the state level, there are protective associations of certain social, healthcare, and firearm policies to firearm-related suicide and homicide rates. Healthcare resources play a role in population-level firearm outcomes but alone are not sufficient to decrease firearm-related homicide or suicide.

The relationship of nursing practice laws to suicide and homicide rates: a longitudinal analysis of US states from 2012 to 2016.

BACKGROUND: Nursing resources can have a protective effect on patient outcomes, but nurses and nursing scope of practice have not been studied in relation to injury outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine whether scope of practice and ease of practice laws for nurse practitioners and registered nurses are associated with suicide and homicide rates in the United States. METHODS: This state-level analysis used data from 2012 to 2016. The outcome variables were age-adjusted suicide and homicide rates. The predictor variables were NP scope of practice by state (limited, partial, or full) and RN ease of practice (state RN licensure compact membership status). Covariates were state sociodemographic, healthcare, and firearm/firearm policy context variables that have a known relationship with the outcomes. RESULTS: Full scope of practice for NPs was associated with lower rates of suicide and homicide, with stronger associations for suicide. Likewise, greater ease of practice for RNs was associated with lower suicide and homicide rates. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that nurses are an important component of the healthcare ecosystem as it relates to injury outcomes. Laws supporting full nursing practice may have a protective effect on population health in the area of injuries and future studies should explore this relationship further.

The impact of health inequities on physicians' occupational well-being during COVID-19: A qualitative analysis from four US cities.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe frontline physicians' perceptions of the impact of racial-ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in COVID-19 infection and mortality on their occupational well-being. METHODS: One hundred and forty-five qualitative, semistructured interviews were conducted between February 2021 and June 2022 with hospital medicine, emergency medicine, pulmonary/critical care, and palliative care physicians caring for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in four US cities. RESULTS: Physicians reported encountering COVID-related health disparities and inequities at the societal, organizational, and individual levels. Encountering these inequities, in turn, contributed to stress among frontline physicians, whose concerns revealed how structural conditions both shaped COVID disparities and constrained their ability to protect populations at risk from poor outcomes. Physicians reported feeling complicit in the perpetuation of inequities or helpless to mitigate observed inequities and experienced feelings of grief, guilt, moral distress, and burnout. CONCLUSIONS: Health inequities are an under-acknowledged source of physicians' occupational stress that requires solutions beyond the clinical context.

COVID-19 and the political geography of racialisation: Ethnographic cases in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Detroit.

The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed health systems around the globe, and intensified the lethality of social and political inequality. In the United States, where public health departments have been severely defunded, Black, Native, Latinx communities and those experiencing poverty in the country's largest cities are disproportionately infected and disproportionately dying. Based on our collective ethnographic work in three global cities in the U.S. (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Detroit), we identify how the political geography of racialisation potentiated the COVID-19 crisis, exacerbating the social and economic toll of the pandemic for non-white communities, and undercut the public health response. Our analysis is specific to the current COVID19 crisis in the U.S, however the lessons from these cases are important for understanding and responding to the corrosive political processes that have entrenched inequality in pandemics around the world.