Resident worklife and wellness through the late phase of the pandemic: a mixed methods national survey study.

BACKGROUND: System contributors to resident burnout and well-being have been under-studied. We sought to determine factors associated with resident burnout and identify at risk groups. METHODS: We performed a US national survey between July 15 2022 and April 21, 2023 of residents in 36 specialties in 14 institutions, using the validated Mini ReZ survey with three 5 item subscales: 1) supportive workplace, 2) work pace/electronic medical record (EMR) stress, and 3) residency-specific factors (sleep, peer support, recognition by program, interruptions and staff relationships). Multilevel regressions and thematic analysis of 497 comments determined factors related to burnout. RESULTS: Of 1118 respondents (approximate median response rate 32%), 48% were female, 57% White, 21% Asian, 6% LatinX and 4% Black, with 25% PGY 1 s, 25% PGY 2 s, and 22% PGY 3 s. Programs included internal medicine (15.1%) and family medicine (11.3%) among 36 specialties. Burnout (found in 42%) was higher in females (51% vs 30% in males, p = 0.001) and PGY 2's (48% vs 35% in PGY-1 s, p = 0.029). Challenges included chaotic environments (41%) and sleep impairment (32%); favorable aspects included teamwork (94%), peer support (93%), staff support (87%) and program recognition (68%). Worklife subscales were consistently lower in females while PGY-2's reported the least supportive work environments. Worklife challenges relating to burnout included sleep impairment (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 2.82 (95% CIs 1.94, 4.19), absolute risk difference (ARD) in burnout 15.9%), poor work control (aOR 2.25 (1.42, 3.58), ARD 12.2%) and chaos (aOR 1.73 (1.22, 2.47), ARD 7.9%); program recognition was related to lower burnout (aOR 0.520 (0.356, 0.760), ARD 9.3%). These variables explained 55% of burnout variance. Qualitative data confirmed sleep impairment, lack of schedule control, excess EMR and patient volume as stressors. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a nomenclature and systematic method for addressing well-being during residency. Work conditions for females and PGY 2's may merit attention first.

Virtual Scribes and Physician Time Spent on Electronic Health Records.

Importance: Time on the electronic health record (EHR) is associated with burnout among physicians. Newer virtual scribe models, which enable support from either a real-time or asynchronous scribe, have the potential to reduce the burden of the EHR and EHR-related documentation. Objective: To characterize the association of use of virtual scribes with changes in physicians' EHR time and note and order composition and to identify the physician, scribe, and scribe response factors associated with changes in EHR time upon virtual scribe use. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, pre-post quality improvement study of 144 physicians across specialties who had used a scribe for at least 3 months from January 2020 to September 2022, were affiliated with Brigham and Women's Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital, and cared for patients in the outpatient setting. Data were analyzed from November 2022 to January 2024. Exposure: Use of either a real-time or asynchronous virtual scribe. Main Outcomes: Total EHR time, time on notes, and pajama time (5:30 pm to 7:00 am on weekdays and nonscheduled weekends and holidays), all per appointment; proportion of the note written by the physician and team contribution to orders. Results: The main study sample included 144 unique physicians who had used a virtual scribe for at least 3 months in 152 unique scribe participation episodes (134 [88.2%] had used an asynchronous scribe service). Nearly two-thirds of the physicians (91 physicians [63.2%]) were female and more than half (86 physicians [59.7%]) were in primary care specialties. Use of a virtual scribe was associated with significant decreases in total EHR time per appointment (mean [SD] of 5.6 [16.4] minutes; P < .001) in the 3 months after vs the 3 months prior to scribe use. Scribe use was also associated with significant decreases in note time per appointment and pajama time per appointment (mean [SD] of 1.3 [3.3] minutes; P < .001 and 1.1 [4.0] minutes; P = .004). In a multivariable linear regression model, the following factors were associated with significant decreases in total EHR time per appointment with a scribe use at 3 months: practicing in a medical specialty (-7.8; 95% CI, -13.4 to -2.2 minutes), greater baseline EHR time per appointment (-0.3; 95% CI, -0.4 to -0.2 minutes per additional minute of baseline EHR time), and decrease in the percentage of the note contributed by the physician (-9.1; 95% CI, -17.3 to -0.8 minutes for every percentage point decrease). Conclusions and Relevance: In 2 academic medical centers, use of virtual scribes was associated with significant decreases in total EHR time, time spent on notes, and pajama time, all per appointment. Virtual scribes may be particularly effective among medical specialists and those physicians with greater baseline EHR time.

Assessment of EHR Efficiency Tools and Resources Associated with Physician Time Spent on the Inbox.

BACKGROUND: Physicians are experiencing an increasing burden of messaging within the electronic health record (EHR) inbox. Studies have called for the implementation of tools and resources to mitigate this burden, but few studies have evaluated how these interventions impact time spent on inbox activities. OBJECTIVE: Explore the association between existing EHR efficiency tools and clinical resources on primary care physician (PCP) inbox time. DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional study of inbox time among PCPs in network clinics affiliated with an academic health system. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifteen community-based PCPs. MAIN MEASURES: Inbox time, in hours, normalized to eight physician scheduled hours (IB-Time8). KEY RESULTS: Following adjustment for physician sex as well as panel size, age, and morbidity, we observed no significant differences in inbox time for physicians with and without message triage, custom inbox QuickActions, encounter specialists, and message pools. Moreover, IB-Time8 increased by 0.01 inbox hours per eight scheduled hours for each additional staff member resource in a physician's practice (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Physician inbox time was not associated with existing EHR efficiency tools evaluated in this study. Yet, there may be a slight increase in inbox time among physicians in practices with larger teams.

Understanding what leaders can do to facilitate healthcare workers' feeling valued: improving our knowledge of the strongest burnout mitigator.

AIM: Feeling valued is a striking mitigator of burnout yet how to facilitate healthcare workers (HCWs) feeling valued has not been adequately studied. This study discovered factors relating to HCWs feeling valued so leaders can mitigate burnout and retain their workforce. METHOD: The Coping with COVID-19 survey, initiated in March 2020 by the American Medical Association, was distributed to 208 US healthcare organisations. Of the respondents, 37 685 physicians, advanced practice clinicians, nurses, and other clinical staff answered questions that assessed burnout, intent to leave and whether they felt valued.Quantitative analysis looked at odds of burnout and intent to leave among the highest versus lowest feeling valued (FV) groups. Open-ended comments provided by 5559 respondents with high or low sense of FV were analysed to understand aspects of work life that contributed to FV. RESULTS: Of 37 685 respondents, 45% felt valued; HCWs who felt highly valued had 8.3 times lower odds of burnout and 10.2 lower odds of intent to leave than those who did not feel valued at all. Qualitative data identified six themes associated with FV: (1) physical safety, (2) compensation and pandemic-related finances, (3) transparent and frequent communication, (4) effective teamwork, (5) empathetic and respectful leaders, and (6) organisational support. CONCLUSION: This US study demonstrates that FV correlates with burnout and intent to leave, yet only 45% of HCWs feel valued. Six themes link to interventions leaders can follow to facilitate HCWs FV and potentially reduce burnout and increase retention for a challenged healthcare workforce.

More Tethered to the EHR: EHR Workload Trends Among Academic Primary Care Physicians, 2019-2023.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate recent trends in primary care physician (PCP) electronic health record (EHR) workload. METHODS: This longitudinal study observed the EHR use of 141 academic PCPs over 4 years (May 2019 to March 2023). Ambulatory full-time equivalency (aFTE), visit volume, and panel size were evaluated. Electronic health record time and inbox message volume were measured per 8 hours of scheduled clinic appointments. RESULTS: From the pre-COVID-19 pandemic year (May 2019 to February 2020) to the most recent study year (April 2022 to March 2023), the average time PCPs spent in the EHR per 8 hours of scheduled clinic appointments increased (+28.4 minutes, 7.8%), as did time in orders (+23.1 minutes, 58.9%), inbox (+14.0 minutes, 24.4%), chart review (+7.2 minutes, 13.0%), notes (+2.9 minutes, 2.3%), outside scheduled hours on days with scheduled appointments (+6.4 minutes, 8.2%), and on unscheduled days (+13.6 minutes, 19.9%). Primary care physicians received more patient medical advice requests (+5.4 messages, 55.5%) and prescription messages (+2.3, 19.5%) per 8 hours of scheduled clinic appointments, but fewer patient calls (-2.8, -10.5%) and results messages (-0.3, -2.7%). While total time in the EHR continued to increase in the final study year (+7.7 minutes, 2.0%), inbox time decreased slightly from the year prior (-2.2 minutes, -3.0%). Primary care physicians' average aFTE decreased 5.2% from 0.66 to 0.63 over 4 years. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians' time in the EHR continues to grow. While PCPs' inbox time may be stabilizing, it is still substantially higher than pre-pandemic levels. It is imperative health systems develop strategies to change the EHR workload trajectory to minimize PCPs' occupational stress and mitigate unnecessary reductions in effective physician workforce resulting from the increased EHR burden.

Vacation Days Taken, Work During Vacation, and Burnout Among US Physicians.

Importance: Vacation has been shown to be an important restorative activity in the general population; less is known about physicians' vacation behaviors and their association with burnout and professional fulfillment. Objective: To examine the number of vacation days taken per year and the magnitude of physician work while on vacation and their association with physician burnout and professional fulfillment, by individual and organizational characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional survey of US physicians was conducted between November 20, 2020, and March 23, 2021. Data analysis was performed from March to July 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Index, and professional fulfillment was measured using the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. Number of vacation days taken in the last year, time spent working on patient care and other professional tasks per typical vacation day (ie, work on vacation), electronic health record (EHR) inbox coverage while on vacation, barriers to taking vacation, and standard demographics were collected. Results: Among 3024 respondents, 1790 of 3004 (59.6%), took 15 or fewer days of vacation in the last year, with 597 of 3004 (19.9%) taking 5 or fewer days. The majority, 2104 respondents (70.4%), performed patient care-related tasks on vacation, with 988 of 2988 (33.1%) working 30 minutes or more on a typical vacation day. Less than one-half of physicians (1468 of 2991 physicians [49.1%]) reported having full EHR inbox coverage while on vacation. On multivariable analysis adjusting for personal and professional factors, concern about finding someone to cover clinical responsibilities (odds ratio [OR], 0.48 [95% CI, 0.35-0.65] for quite a bit; OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.21-0.43] for very much) and financial concerns (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.36-0.66] for quite a bit; OR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54] for very much) were associated with decreased likelihood of taking more than 3 weeks of vacation per year. Taking more than 3 weeks of vacation per year (OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.98] for 16-20 days; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.40-0.86] for >20 days vs none) and having full EHR inbox coverage while on vacation (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88) were associated with lower rates of burnout on multivariable analysis, whereas spending 30 minutes or longer per vacation day on patient-related work (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.22-2.04 for 30-60 minutes; OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41-2.77 for 60-90 minutes; OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.36-2.73 for >90 minutes) was associated with higher rates of burnout. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of 3024 physicians, the number of vacation days taken and performing patient-related work while on vacation were associated with physician burnout. System-level efforts to ensure physicians take adequate vacation and have coverage for clinical responsibilities, including EHR inbox, may reduce physician burnout.

Giving Patients the Focused Attention They Deserve.

This viewpoint discusses the need for physicians to give focused attention to patients and the challenges that prevent them from doing so and suggests goals to create conditions that ensure that physicians are fully present during patient visits.

Assessment of Adverse Childhood Experiences, Adverse Professional Experiences, Depression, and Burnout in US Physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To assess associations of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and adverse occupational experiences (AOEs) with depression and burnout in US physicians. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from a representative sample survey of US physicians conducted between November 20, 2020, and March 23, 2021, and from a probability-based sample of other US workers. The ACEs, AOEs, burnout, and depression were assessed using previously published measures. RESULTS: Analyses included data from 1125 of the 3671 physicians (30.6%) who received a mailed survey and 6235 of 90,000 physicians (6.9%) who received an electronic survey. The proportion of physicians age 29-65 who had lived with a family member with substance misuse during childhood (673 of 5039[13.4%]) was marginally lower (P <.001) than that of workers in other professions (448 of 2505 [17.9%]). The proportion of physicians age 29-65 who experienced childhood emotional abuse (823 of 5038 [16.3%]) was similar to that of workers in other professions (406 of 2508 [16.2%]). The average physician depression T-score was 49.60 (raw score ± SD, 6.48±3.15), similar to the normed US average. The AOEs were associated with mild to severe depression, including making a recent significant medical error (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.02, P<.001), being named in a malpractice suit (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.59, P=.008), and experiencing one or more coronavirus disease 2019-related AOEs (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.56 to 1.99, P<.001). Having one or more ACEs was associated with mild to severe depression (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.38 to 1.79, P<.001). The ACEs, coronavirus disease 2019-related AOEs, and medical errors were also associated with burnout. CONCLUSION: Assessing ACEs and AOEs and implementing selective primary prevention interventions may improve population health efforts to mitigate depression and burnout in physicians.

Career Plans of US Physicians After the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the career plans of US physicians at the end of 2021 relative to 2011 and 2014. METHODS: Physicians in the United States were surveyed from December 9, 2021, to January 24, 2022, using methods similar to prior studies in 2011 and 2014. Responding physicians in active practice (n=1884) were included in the analysis. At all time-points, physicians indicated the likelihood they would (1) reduce clinical work hours in the next 12 months and (2) leave their current practice within 24 months. RESULTS: In 2021, 542 of 1344 (40.3%) indicated that it was "likely" or "definite" they would reduce clinical work hours in the next 12 months compared with 1120 of 6950 (16.1%) and 1275 of 6452 (19.8%) in 2011 and 2014. In 2021, 466 of 1817 (25.6%) indicated it was "likely" or "definite" they would leave their current practice in the next 24 months compared with 1284 of 6975 (18.4%) and 1726 of 6496 (26.6%) in 2011 and 2014. On multivariable analysis pooling responders from 2011, 2014, and 2021, physicians who responded in 2021 had higher odds of reporting intent to reduce clinical work hours compared with those who responded in 2014 (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 2.73 to 3.57), whereas those responding in 2011 had lower odds relative to 2014 (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.89). CONCLUSION: Roughly two of every five US physicians intend to reduce their clinical work hours in the next year, more than double previous rates. These findings have potentially profound implications for the adequacy of a US physician workforce already facing substantial shortages.

Politicization of Medical Care, Burnout, and Professionally Conflicting Emotions Among Physicians During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of politicization of medical care with burnout, professional fulfillment, and professionally conflicting emotions (eg, less empathy, compassion; more anger, frustration, resentment). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Physicians in select specialties were surveyed between December 2021 and January 2022 using methods similar to our prior studies, with additional assessment of politicization of medical care; moral distress; and having had to compromise professional integrity, workload, and professionally conflicting emotions. RESULTS: In a sample of 2780 physicians in emergency medicine, critical care, noncritical care hospital medicine, and ambulatory care, stress related to politicization of medical care was reported by 91.8% of physicians. On multivariable analysis, compromised integrity (odds ratio [OR], 3.64; 95% CI, 2.31 to 5.98), moral distress (OR, 2.82; 95% CI, 2.16 to 3.68), and feeling more exhausted taking care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (OR, 3.46; 95% CI, 2.63 to 4.54) were associated with burnout. Compromised integrity, moral distress, and feeling more exhausted taking care of patients with COVID-19 were also statistically significantly associated with lower odds of professional fulfillment and professionally conflicting emotions. Stress related to conversations about non-approved COVID-19 therapies (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.89), patient resistance to mask wearing (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.35 to 2.55), and working more hours due to COVID (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.89) were associated with professionally conflicting emotions. CONCLUSION: Most physicians experienced intrusion of politics into medical care during the pandemic. These experiences are associated with professionally conflicting emotions, including less compassion and empathy, greater frustration, and resentment. COVID-19-related moral distress and compromised integrity were also associated with less professional fulfillment and greater occupational burnout.

Changes in Physician Electronic Health Record Use With the Expansion of Telemedicine.

Importance: Understanding the drivers of electronic health record (EHR) burden, including EHR time and patient messaging, may directly inform strategies to address physician burnout. Given the COVID-19-induced expansion of telemedicine-now used for a substantial proportion of ambulatory encounters-its association with EHR burden should be evaluated. Objective: To measure the association of the telemedicine expansion with time spent working in the EHR and with patient messaging among ambulatory physicians before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal cohort study analyzed weekly EHR metadata of ambulatory physicians at UCSF Health, a large academic medical center. The same EHR measures were compared for 1 year before the COVID-19 pandemic (August 2018-September 2019) with the same period 1 year after its onset (August 2020-September 2021). Multivariable regression models evaluating the association between level of telemedicine use and EHR use were then assessed after the onset of the pandemic. The sample included all physician-weeks with at least 1 scheduled half-day clinic in the 11 largest ambulatory specialties at UCSF Health. Data analyses were performed from March 1, 2022, through July 1, 2023. Exposures: Physicians' weekly modality mix of either entirely face-to-face visits, mixed modalities, or entirely telemedicine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The EHR time during and outside of patient scheduled hours (PSHs), time spent documenting (normalized per 8 PSHs), and electronic messages sent to and received from patients. Results: The study sample included 1052 physicians (437 [41.5%] men and 615 [58.5%] women) during 115 weeks, which provided 35 697 physician-week observations. Comparing the period before to the period after pandemic onset showed that physician time spent working in the EHR during PSHs increased from 4.53 to 5.46 hours per 8 PSH (difference, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.98; P < 0.001); outside of PSHs, increased from 4.29 to 5.34 hours (difference, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95-1.14; P < 0.001); and time documenting during and outside of PSHs increased from 6.35 to 8.18 hours (difference, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.72-1.94; P < 0.001). Mean weekly messages received from patients increased from 16.76 to 30.33, and messages sent to patients increased from 13.82 to 29.83. In multivariable models, weeks with a mix of face-to-face and telemedicine (ß, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.55; P < .001) visits or entirely telemedicine (ß, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74-1.09; P < .001) had more EHR time during PSHs than all face-to-face weeks, with similar results for EHR time outside of PSHs. There was no association between telemedicine use and messages received from patients, whereas mixed modalities (ß, -0.90; 95% CI, -1.73 to -0.08; P = .03) and all telemedicine (ß, -4.06; 95% CI, -5.19 to -2.93; P < .001) were associated with fewer messages sent to patients compared with entirely face-to-face weeks. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this longitudinal cohort study suggest that telemedicine is associated with greater physician time spent working in the EHR, both during and outside of scheduled hours, mostly documenting visits and not messaging patients. Health systems may need to adjust productivity expectations for physicians and develop strategies to address EHR documentation burden for physicians.

Characterizing the Patterns of Electronic Health Record-Integrated Secure Messaging Use: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Communication among health care professionals is essential for the delivery of safe clinical care. Secure messaging has rapidly emerged as a new mode of asynchronous communication. Despite its popularity, relatively little is known about how secure messaging is used and how such use contributes to communication burden. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to characterize the use of an electronic health record-integrated secure messaging platform across 14 hospitals and 263 outpatient clinics within a large health care system. METHODS: We collected metadata on the use of the Epic Systems Secure Chat platform for 6 months (July 2022 to January 2023). Information was retrieved on message volume, response times, message characteristics, messages sent and received by users, user roles, and work settings (inpatient vs outpatient). RESULTS: A total of 32,881 users sent 9,639,149 messages during the study. Median daily message volume was 53,951 during the first 2 weeks of the study and 69,526 during the last 2 weeks, resulting in an overall increase of 29% (P=.03). Nurses were the most frequent users of secure messaging (3,884,270/9,639,149, 40% messages), followed by physicians (2,387,634/9,639,149, 25% messages), and medical assistants (1,135,577/9,639,149, 12% messages). Daily message frequency varied across users; inpatient advanced practice providers and social workers interacted with the highest number of messages per day (median 19). Conversations were predominantly between 2 users (1,258,036/1,547,879, 81% conversations), with a median of 2 conversational turns and a median response time of 2.4 minutes. The largest proportion of inpatient messages was from nurses to physicians (972,243/4,749,186, 20% messages) and physicians to nurses (606,576/4,749,186, 13% messages), while the largest proportion of outpatient messages was from physicians to nurses (344,048/2,192,488, 16% messages) and medical assistants to other medical assistants (236,694/2,192,488, 11% messages). CONCLUSIONS: Secure messaging was widely used by a diverse range of health care professionals, with ongoing growth throughout the study and many users interacting with more than 20 messages per day. The short message response times and high messaging volume observed highlight the interruptive nature of secure messaging, raising questions about its potentially harmful effects on clinician workflow, cognition, and errors.

Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Implementing Core Electronic Health Record Use Metrics for Ambulatory Care: Virtual Consensus Conference Proceedings.

Precise, reliable, valid metrics that are cost-effective and require reasonable implementation time and effort are needed to drive electronic health record (EHR) improvements and decrease EHR burden. Differences exist between research and vendor definitions of metrics. PROCESS: We convened three stakeholder groups (health system informatics leaders, EHR vendor representatives, and researchers) in a virtual workshop series to achieve consensus on barriers, solutions, and next steps to implementing the core EHR use metrics in ambulatory care. CONCLUSION: Actionable solutions identified to address core categories of EHR metric implementation challenges include: (1) maintaining broad stakeholder engagement, (2) reaching agreement on standardized measure definitions across vendors, (3) integrating clinician perspectives, and (4) addressing cognitive and EHR burden. Building upon the momentum of this workshop's outputs offers promise for overcoming barriers to implementing EHR use metrics.

Reduced Accuracy of Intake Screening Questionnaires Tied to Quality Metrics.

Clinical workflows that prioritize repetitive patient intake screening to meet performance metrics may have unintended consequences. This retrospective analysis of electronic health record data from 24 Federally Qualified Health Centers assessed effectiveness and accuracy of the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) for depression screening and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2 (GAD-2) for anxiety screening from 2019 to 2021. Scores of over 91% of PHQ-2 and GAD-2 tests indicated low likelihood of depression or anxiety, which diverged markedly from published literature on screening outcomes. Visit-based screenings linked to performance metrics may not be delivering the intended value in a real-world setting and risk distracting clinical effort from other high value activities.

How can artificial intelligence decrease cognitive and work burden for front line practitioners?

Artificial intelligence (AI) has tremendous potential to improve the cognitive and work burden of clinicians across a range of clinical activities, which could lead to reduced burnout and better clinical care. The recent explosion of generative AI nicely illustrates this potential. Developers and organizations deploying AI have a responsibility to ensure AI is designed and implemented with end-user input, has mechanisms to identify and potentially reduce bias, and that the impact on cognitive and work burden is measured, monitored, and improved. This article focuses specifically on the role AI can play in reducing cognitive and work burden, outlines the critical issues associated with the use of AI, and serves as a call to action for vendors and users to work together to develop functionality that addresses these challenges.

Burnout Among Hospitalists During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic: a National Mixed Methods Survey Study.

BACKGROUND  : Hospitalist physician stress was exacerbated by the pandemic, yet there have been no large scale studies of contributing factors. OBJECTIVE: Assess remediable components of burnout in hospitalists. PARTICIPANTS, STUDY DESIGN AND MEASURES: In this Coping with COVID study, we focused on assessment of stress factors among 1022 hospital-based clinicians surveyed between April to December 2020. We assessed variables previously associated with burnout (anxiety/depression due to COVID-19, work overload, fear of exposure or transmission, mission/purpose, childcare stress and feeling valued) on 4 point Likert scales, with results dichotomized with the top two categories meaning "present"; burnout was assessed with the Mini Z single item measure (top 3 choices = burnout). Quantitative analyses utilized multilevel logistic regression; qualitative analysis used inductive and deductive methods. These data informed a conceptual model. KEY RESULTS: Of 58,408 HCWs (median response rate 32%), 1022 were hospital-based clinicians (906 (89%) physicians; 449 (44%) female; 469 (46%) White); 46% of these hospital-based clinicians reported burnout. Work overload was associated with almost 5 times the odds of burnout (OR 4.9, 95% CIs 3.67, 6.85, p < 0.001), and those with anxiety or depression had 4 times the odds of burnout (OR 4.2, CIs 3.21, 7.12, p < 0.001), while those feeling valued had half the burnout odds (OR 0.43, CIs 0.31, 0.61, p < 0.001). Regression models estimated 42% of burnout variance was explained by these variables. In open-ended comments, leadership support was helpful, with "great leadership" represented by transparency, regular updates, and opportunities to ask questions. CONCLUSIONS: In this national study of hospital medicine, 2 variables were significantly related to burnout (workload and mental health) while two variables (feeling valued and leadership) were likely mitigators. These variables merit further investigation as means of reducing burnout in hospital medicine.

The Deep Work of Doctoring-Prioritizing Relationships in Medicine.

This essay discusses how the deep work of doctoring leveraged with technology can bring us close to the quadruple aim of better care, better health, lower cost, and fulfilling work.

Association of physician burnout with perceived EHR work stress and potentially actionable factors.

OBJECTIVE: Physicians of all specialties experienced unprecedented stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating preexisting burnout. We examine burnout's association with perceived and actionable electronic health record (EHR) workload factors and personal, professional, and organizational characteristics with the goal of identifying levers that can be targeted to address burnout. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey of physicians of all specialties in an academic health center, using a standard measure of burnout, self-reported EHR work stress, and EHR-based work assessed by the number of messages regarding prescription reauthorization and use of a staff pool to triage messages. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses examined the relationship among burnout, perceived EHR work stress, and actionable EHR work factors. RESULTS: Of 1038 eligible physicians, 627 responded (60% response rate), 49.8% reported burnout symptoms. Logistic regression analysis suggests that higher odds of burnout are associated with physicians feeling higher level of EHR stress (odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.25), having more prescription reauthorization messages (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.47), not feeling valued (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.69-7.22) or aligned in values with clinic leaders (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.87-4.27), in medical practice for ≤15 years (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.63-4.12), and sleeping for <6 h/night (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.12-2.67). DISCUSSION: Perceived EHR stress and prescription reauthorization messages are significantly associated with burnout, as are non-EHR factors such as not feeling valued or aligned in values with clinic leaders. Younger physicians need more support. CONCLUSION: A multipronged approach targeting actionable levers and supporting young physicians is needed to implement sustainable improvements in physician well-being.