180° view on general practitioners' leadership skills: practice-level comparisons of leader and staff assessments using data from the cluster-randomised controlled IMPROVEjob study.

OBJECTIVES: Strong primary care leaders are needed to assure high quality services for patient populations. This study analysed general practitioners' (GP) leadership skills comparing practice-level self and staff assessments based on the full range of leadership model and the leader-member exchange (LMX). SETTING: The questionnaire survey was conducted among German general practice leaders and their staff participating in the IMPROVEjob trial. PARTICIPANTS: The study population comprised 60 German general practices with 366 participants: 84 GP practice leaders and 282 employees (28 physicians and 254 practice assistants). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Leadership skills of the practice leaders were measured using the Integrative Leadership Questionnaire (German Fragebogen für integrative Führung) and the LMX-7 questionnaire. Leaders rated themselves and practice staff rated their leaders. The data was analysed by paired mean comparisons on the practice level. RESULTS: For most leadership dimensions, practice leaders rated themselves higher than their employees rated them. Differences were found for transformational leadership (p<0.001, d=0.41), especially for the dimensions 'innovation' (p<0.001, d=0.69) and 'individuality focus' (p<0.001, d=0.50). For transactional leadership, the dimension 'goal setting' differed significantly (p<0.01, d=0.30) but not the other dimensions. Scores for negative leadership were low and showed no differences between leaders and employees. Interestingly, employed physicians' rated their practice leaders higher on the two transformational ('performance development', 'providing a vision') and all transactional dimensions. The LMX-7 scale showed high quality relationships between leaders and employees. CONCLUSIONS: This 180° analysis of GPs' leadership skills with self and employee ratings indicated good relationships. There is a potential to improve leadership regarding goal-setting, innovation and focusing on individual team members. These results allow for the development of targeted interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00012677. Registered 16 October 2019.

Exploring Transfer Potentials of the IMPROVEjob Intervention for Strengthening Workplace Health Management in Micro-, Small-, and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Germany: A Qualitative Study.

Micro- and small-sized enterprises (MSE), and small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME) in Germany are often burdened with high levels of psychosocial stressors at work. The IMPROVEjob intervention was originally developed for general practice teams, and aims to promote job satisfaction and reduce psychosocial stressors in the context of workplace health management (WHM). This qualitative study identified challenges and transfer options regarding the transfer of the IMPROVEjob intervention to other MSE/SME settings. Based on previous study results, a comprehensive, qualitative inter- and transdisciplinary approach was developed and conducted between July 2020 and June 2021, also including single interviews and focus group discussion with eleven experts from MSE/SME settings. Data analysis was carried out using a rapid analysis approach. The experts discussed psychosocial topics and didactic formats of the original IMPROVEjob intervention. A lack of access to information on managing work-related psychosocial stressors and inadequate recognition of the importance of psychosocial stressors in the workplace among managers and employees, seemed to be the highest barriers regarding the transfer of the intervention into other MSE/SME settings. The transfer of the IMPROVEjob intervention to other MSE/SME settings requires an adapted intervention format, comprising targeted offers with easy access to information on managing work-related psychosocial stressors and improving WHM in MSE/SME settings.

Small Changes in Patient Arrival and Consultation Times Have Large Effects on Patients' Waiting Times: Simulation Analyses for Primary Care.

(1) Background: Workflows are a daily challenge in general practices. The desired smooth work processes and patient flows are not easy to achieve. This study uses an operational research approach to illustrate the general effects of patient arrival and consultation times on waiting times. (2) Methods: Stochastic simulations were used to model complex daily workflows of general practice. Following classical queuing models, patient arrivals, queuing discipline, and physician consultation times are three key factors influencing work processes. (3) Results: In the first scenario, with patients arriving every 7.6 min and random consultation times, the individual patients' maximum waiting time increased to more than 200 min. The second scenario with random patient arrivals and random consultation times increased the average waiting time by up to 30 min compared to patients arriving on schedule. A busy morning session based on the second scenario was investigated to compare two alternative intervention strategies to reduce subsequent waiting times. Both could reduce waiting times by a multiple for each minute of reduced consultation time. (4) Conclusions: Aiming to improve family physicians' awareness of strategies for improving workflows, this simulation study illustrates the effects of strategies that address consultation times and patient arrivals.

Leadership program with skills training for general practitioners was highly accepted without improving job satisfaction: the cluster randomized IMPROVEjob study.

Leadership has become an increasingly important issue in medicine as leadership skills, job satisfaction and patient outcomes correlate positively. Various leadership training and physician psychological well-being programmes have been developed internationally, yet no standard is established in primary care. The IMPROVEjob leadership program was developed to improve job satisfaction among German general practitioners and practice personnel. Its acceptance and effectiveness were evaluated. The IMPROVEjob intervention is a participatory, interdisciplinary and multimodal leadership intervention that targets leadership, workflows and communication in general practices using three elements: (1) two leadership workshops with skills training; (2) a toolbox with printed and online material, and (3) a 9-month implementation phase supported by facilitators. A cluster-randomised trial with a waiting-list control evaluated the effectiveness on the primary outcome job satisfaction assessed by the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (range 0-100). A mixed-methods approach with questionnaires and participant interviews evaluated the acceptance of the intervention and factors influencing the implementation of intervention content. Statistical analyses respected the clustered data structure. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated intervention adjustments: online instead of on-site workshops, online material instead of facilitator practice visits. Overall, 52 of 60 practices completed the study, with altogether 70 practice leaders, 16 employed physicians, and 182 practice assistants. According to an intention-to-treat analysis, job satisfaction decreased between baseline and follow-up (not significantly) in the total study population and in both study arms, while the subgroup of practice leaders showed a non-significant increase. A mixed multilevel regression model showed no effect of the intervention on job satisfaction (b = - 0.36, p > 0.86), which was influenced significantly by a greater sense of community (b = 0.14, p < 0.05). The acceptance of the IMPROVEjob workshops was high, especially among practice leaders compared to assistants (1 = best to 5 = worst): skills training 1.78 vs. 2.46, discussions within the practice team 1.87 vs. 2.28, group discussions 1.96 vs. 2.21. The process evaluation revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic complicated change processes and delayed the implementation of intervention content in practice routines. The workshops within the participatory IMPROVEjob intervention were rated very positively but the multimodal intervention did not improve job satisfaction 9 months into the pandemic. Qualitative data showed an impairment of implementation processes by the unforeseeable COVID pandemic.Trial registration Registration number: DRKS00012677 on 16/10/2019.

Higher Work-Privacy Conflict and Lower Job Satisfaction in GP Leaders and Practice Assistants Working Full-Time Compared to Part-Time: Results of the IMPROVEjob Study.

Background: Work-privacy conflict (WPC) has become an important issue for medical professionals. The cluster-randomized controlled IMPROVEjob study aimed at improving job satisfaction (primary outcome), with additional outcomes such as examining the work-privacy conflict in German general practice personnel. Using baseline data of this study, the relationship between work-privacy conflict and job satisfaction (JS) was analyzed. In addition, factors associated with higher WPC were identified. Methods: At baseline, 366 participants (general practitioners (GPs) in leadership positions, employed general practitioners, and practice assistants) from 60 German practices completed a questionnaire addressing socio-demographic data and job characteristics. Standardized scales from the German version of the COPSOQ III requested data concerning job satisfaction and work-privacy conflict. Both scores range from 0 (lowest) to 100 (highest). Multilevel analysis accounted for the clustered data. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS and RStudio software, with a significance level set at p < 0.05. Results: Job satisfaction was 77.16 (mean value; SD = 14.30) among GPs in leadership positions (n = 84), 79.61 (SD = 12.85) in employed GPs (n = 28), and 72.58 (SD = 14.42) in practice assistants (n = 254). Mean values for the WPC-scale were higher for professionals with more responsibilities: GPs in leadership positions scored highest with 64.03 (SD = 29.96), followed by employed physicians (M = 45.54, SD =30.28), and practice assistants (M = 32.67, SD = 27.41). General practitioners and practice assistants working full-time reported significantly higher work-privacy conflict than those working part-time (p < 0.05). In a multilevel analysis, work-privacy conflict was significantly associated with job satisfaction (p < 0.001). A multiple regression analysis identified working hours, as well as and being a practice owner or an employed physician as factors significantly influencing WPC. Discussion: WPC was high among general practice leaders and practice personnel working full-time. Future interventions to support practice personnel should focus on reducing WPC, as there is good evidence of its effects on job satisfaction.

Enhanced coverage by integrating site interdependencies in capacitated EMS location models.

In order to allocate limited resources in emergency medical services (EMS) networks, mathematical models are used to select sites and their capacities. Many existing standard models are based on simplifying assumptions, including site independency and a similar system-wide busyness of ambulances. In practice, when a site is busy, a call is forwarded to another site. Thus, the busyness of each site depends not only on the rate of calls in the surrounding area, but also on interactions with other facilities. If the demand varies across the urban area, assuming an average system-wide server busy fraction may lead to an overestimation of the actual coverage. We show that site interdependencies can be integrated into the well-known Maximum Expected Covering Location Problem (MEXCLP) by introducing an upper bound for the busyness of each site. We apply our new mathematical formulation to the case of a local EMS provider. To evaluate the solution quality, we use a discrete event simulation based on anonymized real-world call data. Results of our simulation-optimization approach indicate that the coverage can be improved in most cases by taking site interdependencies into account, leading to an improved ambulance allocation and a faster emergency care.

Job Satisfaction and Chronic Stress of General Practitioners and Their Teams: Baseline Data of a Cluster-Randomised Trial (IMPROVEjob).

Background: A high prevalence of poor job satisfaction and high chronic stress is documented for general practitioners (GPs) and non-physician practice staff from various countries. The reasons are multifactorial and include deficits in leadership, communication and workflows. This publicly funded study evaluates the effectiveness of the newly developed participatory, interdisciplinary, and multimodal IMPROVEjob intervention on improving job satisfaction among GPs and practice personnel. Here, we report the baseline characteristics of the participating GPs and practice assistants, focusing on job satisfaction and perceived chronic stress. Methods: The IMPROVEjob study was performed as a cluster-randomised, controlled trial (cRCT) with German GP practices in the North Rhine Region. The IMPROVEjob intervention comprised two leadership workshops (one for practice leaders only; a second for leaders and practice assistants), a toolbox with supplemental printed and online material, and a nine-month implementation phase supported by IMPROVEjob facilitators. The intervention addressed issues of leadership, communication, and work processes. During study nurse visits, participants completed questionnaires at baseline and after nine months follow up. The primary outcome was the change in job satisfaction as measured by the respective scale of the validated German version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (German COPSOQ, version 2018). Perceived chronic stress was measured using the Trier Inventory of Chronic Stress (TICS- SSCS). Results: Recruitment of 60 practices was successful: 21 were solo, 39 were group practices. At baseline, n = 84 practice owners, n = 28 employed physicians and n = 254 practice assistants were included. The mean age of all participants was 44.4 (SD = 12.8). At baseline, the job satisfaction score in the total sample was 74.19 of 100 (±14.45) and the perceived chronic stress score was 19.04 of 48 (±8.78). Practice assistants had a significantly lower job satisfaction than practice owners (p < 0.05) and employed physicians (p < 0.05). In the regression analysis, perceived chronic stress was negatively associated with job satisfaction (b= -0.606, SE b = 0.082, p < 0.001, ICC = 0.10). Discussion: The degree of job satisfaction was similar to those in other medical professionals published in studies, while perceived chronic stress was markedly higher compared to the general German population. These findings confirm the need for interventions to improve psychological wellbeing in GP practice personnel.