Helping the healer: population-informed workplace wellness recommendations for physician well-being.

Background: The need to keep physicians healthy and in practice is critical as demand for doctors grows faster than the supply. Workplace wellness programmes can improve employee health and retain skilled workers. Aims: To broaden our understanding about ways to help doctors coping with mental health problems and to develop population-informed workplace wellness recommendations for physician populations. Methods: Researchers surveyed physicians to document potential warning signs and prevention strategies. A survey was issued to doctors who presented to a physician health programme with mental health complaints. The survey captured respondents' feedback about how to identify and prevent mental health problems. Data were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics. Results: There were 185 participants. Half of respondents believed their problems could have been recognized sooner and 60% said they exhibited signs that could aid in earlier detection. Potential warnings included fluctuations in mood (67%), increased comments about stress/burnout (49%) and behavioural changes (32%). To improve detection, prevention and care-seeking for mental health problems, doctors endorsed multiple items related to the use of interpersonal supports, personal factors and organizational dynamics throughout the survey. Conclusions: The findings confirmed earlier work demonstrating the value of social and organizational support in maintaining physician health. It further indicated that earlier identification and/or prevention of mental health problems is not only possible, but that medical organizations are uniquely situated to carry out this work.

Challenging cognitive cases among physician populations: case vignettes and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Physicians are not immune to cognitive impairment. Because of the risks created by practising doctors with these issues, some have suggested developing objective, population-specific measures of evaluation and screening guidelines to assess dysfunction. However, there is very little published information from which to construct such resources. AIMS: To highlight the presentation characteristics and provide evaluation recommendations specific to the needs of physicians with actual or presumed cognitive impairment. METHODS: A retrospective database and chart review of cognitively impaired doctors who presented to a physician health programme (PHP). Complex cases were highlighted using simple descriptives and clinical vignettes. RESULTS: A total of 124 cases were included. Clients presented with a variety of issues other than cognitive concerns. We identified four principal domains of impairment: (i) diseases of (or in) the brain (48%); (ii) mood/ anxiety disorders or treatment side effects (28%); (iii) substance use (9%) and (iv) traumatic brain injury (7%). Age was not a good predictor of impairment and brief screening using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment demonstrated a ceiling effect with this cohort. Although many clients underwent some type of professional or personal transition, impairment did not necessarily indicate worse functioning after care. CONCLUSIONS: Physician cognitive evaluations should consider a variety of secondary sources of information, particularly vocational performance reports. It may take time before cognitive impairment can be diagnosed or ruled-out in this population. Prior assumptions, especially for non-cognitive referrals, can lead to inaccurate diagnosis and referrals. PHPs must manage cognitive cases carefully, not only in their clinical complexity but also in their psychosocial aspects.

Physician health programmes and malpractice claims: reducing risk through monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Physician health programmes (PHPs) are peer-assistance organizations that provide support to physicians struggling with addiction or with physical or mental health challenges. While the services they offer are setting new standards for recovery and care, they are not immune to public debate and criticism since some have concerns about those who are enrolled in, or have completed, such programmes and their subsequent ability to practice medicine safely. AIMS: To examine whether medical malpractice claims were associated with monitoring by a PHP using a retrospective examination of administrative data. METHODS: Data on PHP clients who were insured by the largest malpractice carrier in the state were examined. First, a business-model analysis of malpractice risk examined relative risk ratings between programme clients and a matched physician cohort. Second, Wilcoxon analysis examined differences in annual rates of pre- and post-monitoring claims for PHP clients only. RESULTS: Data on 818 clients was available for analysis. After monitoring, those enrolled in the programme showed a 20% lower malpractice risk than the matched cohort. Furthermore physicians' annual rate of claims were significantly lower after programme monitoring among PHP clients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is the only study examining this issue to date. While there are a variety of reasons why physicians present to PHPs, this study demonstrates that treatment and monitoring is associated with a lowered risk of malpractice claims and suggests that patient care may be improved by PHP monitoring.