Physician and Advanced Practice Clinician Burnout in Rural and Urban Settings.

INTRODUCTION: Recruiting rural-practicing clinicians is a high priority. In this study, we explored burnout and contributing work conditions among rural, urban, and family practice physicians and advanced practice clinicians (APCs) in an Upper Midwestern health care system. METHODS: The Mini Z burnout reduction measure was administered by anonymous electronic survey in March 2022. We conducted bivariate analyses of study variables, then assessed relationships of study variables to burnout with multivariate binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 1118 clinicians (63% response rate), 589 physicians and 496 APCs were included in this study (n = 1085). Most were female (56%), physicians (54%), and White (86%), while 21% were in family practice, 46% reported burnout, and 349 practiced rurally. Rural and urban clinician burnout rates were comparable (45% vs 47%). Part-time work protected against burnout for family practice and rural clinicians, but not urban clinicians. In multivariate models for rural clinicians, stress (OR: 8.53, 95% CI: 4.09 to 17.78, P < .001), lack of workload control (OR: 3.06, 95% CI: 1.47-6.36, P = .003), busy/chaotic environments (OR: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.29-4.99, P = .007), and intent to leave (OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.06-4.45, P = .033) increased burnout odds. In family practice clinicians, stress (OR: 13.43 95% CI: 4.90-36.79, P < .001) also significantly increased burnout odds. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout was comparable between rural and urban physicians and APCs. Part-time work was associated with decreased burnout in rural and family practice clinicians. Addressing burnout drivers (stress, workload control, chaos) may improve rural work environments, reduce turnover, and aid rural clinician recruitment. Addressing stress may be particularly impactful in family practice.

Teamwork measure relates to provider experience, burnout, and intent to stay.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a brief teamwork measure and determine how teamwork relates to provider experience, burnout, and work intentions. STUDY DESIGN: Survey of clinicians. METHODS: We analyzed data from Optum's 2019 biannual clinician survey, including a validated burnout measure and measures of provider experience and intent to stay. A 6-item measure of team effectiveness (TEAM) focused on efficiency, communication, continuous improvement, and leadership. Construct validity was assessed with content, reliability, and correlation with burnout. Generalized estimating equations with robust SEs determined relationships among TEAM score, provider experience, and intent to stay, controlling for demographics, clustering, and practice factors. RESULTS: Of 1500 physicians and advanced practice clinicians (1387 with complete data; response rate 56%), there were 58% in primary care; 57% were women, and 38% identified as Asian, Black/Hispanic, or another race/ethnicity other than White non-Hispanic. Burnout was present in 30%. The Cronbach α was excellent (0.86), and TEAM correlated with the validated burnout measure (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of lower burnout with high TEAM score, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.40; P < .0001). Clinicians with TEAM scores of at least 4 were more likely to have positive provider experiences (79% favorable vs 24% with low TEAM score; P < .001), had lower burnout rates (17% vs 44%%; P < .001), and more often intended to stay (93% vs 65%; P < .001). TEAM index score was strongly associated with provider experience (adjusted OR, 11.72; 95% CI, 8.11-16.95; P < .001) and intent to stay (adjusted OR, 7.24; 95% CI, 5.34-9.83; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The TEAM index is related to provider experience, burnout, and intent to stay, and it may help organizations optimize clinical work environments.

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.

Trends in Clinician Burnout With Associated Mitigating and Aggravating Factors During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected clinician health and retention. Objective: To describe trends in burnout from 2019 through 2021 with associated mitigating and aggravating factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional surveys were sent to physicians and advanced practice clinicians throughout 120 large US health care organizations between February 2019 and December 2021. From 56 090 surveys, there were 20 627 respondents. Exposures: Work conditions and COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surveys measured time pressure, chaos, work control, teamwork, electronic health record use, values alignment, satisfaction, burnout, intent to leave, and in 2021, feeling valued. Multivariate regressions controlling for gender, race and ethnicity, years in practice, and role determined burnout, satisfaction, and intent-to-leave correlates. Results: Of the 20 627 respondents (median response rate, 58% [IQR, 34%-86%; difference, 52%]), 67% were physicians, 51% female, and 66% White. Burnout was 45% in 2019, 40% to 45% in early 2020, 50% in late 2020, and 60% in late 2021. Intent to leave increased from 24% in 2019 to more than 40% as job satisfaction decreased. Higher burnout was seen in chaotic workplaces (odds ratio [OR], 1.51; 95% CI, 1.38-1.66; P < .001) and with low work control (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.91-2.30; P < .001). Higher burnout was associated with poor teamwork (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.78-2.43; P < .001), while feeling valued was associated with lower burnout (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.18-0.27; P < .001). In time trends, burnout was consistently higher with chaos and poor work control. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2021 burnout was 36% (95% CI, 31%-42%) in calm environments vs 78% (95% CI, 73%-84%) if chaotic (absolute difference, 42%; 95% CI, 34%-49%; P < .001), and 39% (95% CI, 33%-44%) with good work control vs 75% (95% CI, 69%-81%) if poor (absolute difference, 36%; 95% CI, 27%-44%; P < .001). Good teamwork was associated with lower burnout rates (49%; 95% CI, 44%-54%) vs poor teamwork (88%; 95% CI, 80%-97%; absolute difference, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-48%; P < .001), as was feeling valued (37%; 95% CI, 31%-44%) vs not feeling valued (69%; 95% CI, 63%-74%; absolute difference, 32%; 95% CI, 22%-39%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this survey study show that in 2020 through 2021, burnout and intent to leave gradually increased, rose sharply in late 2021, and varied by chaos, work control, teamwork, and feeling valued. Monitoring these variables could provide mechanisms for worker protection.

Designing the careful and kind clinic: an evidence-based approach.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that creating a 'healthy workplace' can be of profound importance for clinicians, team members and patients. Yet there have been few papers that have proposed mechanisms to take decades of research and translate this into a practical list of options for leaders and managers to take into account when structuring a clinic based on care and kindness to achieve optimal health. EVIDENCE: We bring together 20 years of scholarship linking care of the caregivers with outcomes for caregivers and patients. The data are used to support both structures and cultures that will result in satisfied and thriving healthcare team members, as well as satisfied and healthy patients. RESULTS: The clinic based on care of the caregivers will be structured to address key aspects of worklife that are known to cause either satisfaction or burnout. Aspects of care, such as time pressure, chaotic environments and worker control of their workplace, will be taken into account in clinical design; organisational culture will be supportive and cohesive, emphasising quality, values and communication. Experiences based on gender and race will be measured and continuously improved; and performance will be evaluated in a new, human-centred manner. OUTCOMES: The careful and kind clinic will be a remarkable place to work; in contrast to industrialised healthcare, this will be an environment where health can indeed be optimised, for both workers and patients.

Factors associated with patient trust in their clinicians: Results from the Healthy Work Place Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient trust in their clinicians is an important aspect of health care quality, but little evidence exists on what contributes to patient trust. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine workplace, clinician, and patient correlates of patient trust in their clinician. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The sample used baseline data from the Healthy Work Place trial, a randomized trial of 34 Midwest and East Coast primary care practices to explore factors associated with patient trust in their clinicians. A multivariate "best subset" regression modeling approach was used, starting with an item pool of 45 potential variables. Over 7 million models were tested, with a best subset of correlates determined using standard methods for scale optimization. Skewed variables were transformed to the fifth power using a Box-Cox algorithm. RESULTS: The final model of nine variables explained 38% of variance in patient trust at the patient level and 49% at the clinician level. Trust was related mainly to several aspects of care variables (including satisfaction with explanations, overall satisfaction with provider, and learning about their medical conditions and their clinician's personal manner), with lesser association with patient characteristics and clinician work conditions. CONCLUSION: Trust appears to be primarily related to what happens between clinicians and patients in the examination room. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: System changes such as patient-centered medical homes may have difficulty succeeding if the primacy of physician-patient interactions in inspiring patient trust and satisfaction is not recognized.

Compromised Integrity, Burnout, and Intent to Leave the Job in Critical Care Nurses and Physicians.

To describe relationships between compromised integrity (CI), burnout, and intent-to-leave (ITL) practice in critical care (CC) and noncritical care (non-CC) nurses and physicians. DESIGN: CC nurses (RNs) and physicians (MDs) from the American Medical Association Coping with COVID survey were matched by gender, race, years in practice, and role with non-CC clinicians to determine likelihood of ITL in relation to burnout and CI. SETTING: U.S. Healthcare organizations; July-December 2020. SUBJECTS: One hundred sixty-five CC RNs and 148 CC MDs (n = 313) matched with 165 non-CC RNs and 148 non-CC MDs from 83 healthcare organizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Burnout was measured with a single, validated question that mainly reflects emotional exhaustion (EE), and CI was determined by asking if respondents worried about doing things that compromised their integrity moderately or to a great extent. ITL included those moderately, likely, or definitely, intending to leave. Burnout correlated strongly with CI (tetrachoric r = 0.704 [0.606-0.803]; P < 0.001). Of 626 subjects, 59% experienced burnout, 24% CI, and 33% ITL. CC RNs experienced burnout more often (76%) than non-CC RNs (62%; P < 0.01) and CC MDs (51%; P < 0.001). CI was more frequent in CC RNs (44%) than non-CC RNs (23%) and CC MDs (16%; P < 0.001). In multivariate regressions, CC clinicians experiencing burnout had 50% greater odds of ITL than non-CC clinicians experiencing burnout; odds of ITL were substantially higher (odds ratio, 2.8-3.2) in those with CI regardless of location or burnout. In the ICU, those feeling valued by their organization had one-third the odds of ITL. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout (EE) is high (>50%) among CC RNs and MDs, which may result in losses of CC clinicians while demand rises. Preventing CI independent of burnout may reduce turnover in all settings and especially in ICUs. Feeling valued may promote staff retention.

Reducing burnout and enhancing work engagement among clinicians: The Minnesota experience.

BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Hospital Association (MHA) recognized the impact that burnout and disengagement had on the clinician population. A clinician task force developed a conceptual framework, followed by annual surveys and a series of interventions. Features of the job demands-resources model were used as the conceptual underpinning to this analysis. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the applicability of a clinician-driven conceptual model in understanding burnout and work engagement in the state of Minnesota. METHODOLOGY: Four thousand nine hundred ninety clinicians from 94 MHA member hospitals/systems responded to a 2018 survey using a brief instrument adapted, in part, from previously validated measures. RESULTS: As hypothesized, job demands were strongly related to burnout, whereas resources were most related to work engagement. Variables from the MHA model explained 40% of variability in burnout and 24% of variability in work engagement. Variables related to burnout with the highest beta weights included having sufficient time for work (-0.266), values alignment with leaders (-0.176), and teamwork efficiency (-0.123), all ps < .001. Variables most associated with engagement included values alignment (0.196), feeling appreciated (0.163), and autonomy (0.093), ps < .001. CONCLUSION: Findings support the basic premises of the proposed conceptual model. Remediable work-life conditions, such as having sufficient time to do the job, values alignment with leadership, teamwork efficiency, feeling appreciated, and clinician autonomy, manifested the strongest associations with burnout and work engagement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions reducing job demands and strengthening resources such as values alignment, teamwork efficiency, and clinician autonomy are seen as having the greatest potential efficacy.

Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention.

PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of a shared decision-making (SDM) tool versus guideline-informed usual care in translating evidence into primary care, and to explore how use of the tool changed patient perspectives about diabetes medication decision making. METHODS: In this mixed methods multicenter cluster randomized trial, we included patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and their primary care clinicians. We compared usual care with or without a within-encounter SDM conversation aid. We assessed participant-reported decisions made and quality of SDM (knowledge, satisfaction, and decisional conflict), clinical outcomes, adherence, and observer-based patient involvement in decision-making (OPTION12-scale). We used semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their perspectives. RESULTS: We enrolled 350 patients and 99 clinicians from 20 practices and interviewed 26 patients. Use of the conversation aid increased post-encounter patient knowledge (correct answers, 52% vs. 45%, p = 0.02) and clinician involvement of patients (Mean between-arm difference in OPTION12, 7.3 (95% CI 3, 12); p = 0.003). There were no between-arm differences in treatment choice, patient or clinician satisfaction, encounter length, medication adherence, or glycemic control. Qualitative analyses highlighted differences in how clinicians involved patients in decision making, with intervention patients noting how clinicians guided them through conversations using factors important to them. CONCLUSIONS: Using an SDM conversation aid improved patient knowledge and involvement in SDM without impacting treatment choice, encounter length, medication adherence or improved diabetes control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Future interventions may need to focus specifically on patients with signs of poor treatment fit. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01502891.

Where Trust Flourishes: Perceptions of Clinicians Who Trust Their Organizations and Are Trusted by Their Patients.

PURPOSE: Trust is an essential component of health care. Clinicians need to trust organizational leaders to provide a safe and effective work environment, and patients need to trust their clinicians to deliver high-quality care while addressing their health care needs. We sought to determine perceived characteristics of clinics by clinicians who trust their organizations and whose patients have trust in them. METHODS: We used baseline data from the Healthy Work Place trial, a randomized trial of interventions to improve work life in 34 Midwest and East Coast primary care clinics, to identify clinic characteristics associated with high clinician and patient trust. RESULTS: The study included 165 clinicians with 1,132 patients. High trust by clinicians with patients who trusted them was found for 34% of 162 clinicians with sufficient data for modeling. High clinician-high patient trust occurred when clinicians perceived their organizational cultures to have (1) an emphasis on quality (odds ratio [OR] 4.95; 95% CI, 2.02-12.15; P <.001), (2) an emphasis on communication and information (OR 3.21; 95% CI, 1.33-7.78; P = .01), (3) cohesiveness among clinicians (OR 2.29; 95% CI, 1.25-4.20; P = .008), and (4) values alignment between clinicians and leaders (OR 1.86; 95% CI, 1.23-2.81; P = .003). CONCLUSION: Addressing organizational culture might improve the trust of clinicians whose patients have high trust in them.

Prevalence and correlates of stress and burnout among U.S. healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has put extraordinary stress on healthcare workers. Few studies have evaluated stress by worker role, or focused on experiences of women and people of color. METHODS: The "Coping with COVID" survey assessed US healthcare worker stress. A stress summary score (SSS) incorporated stress, fear of exposure, anxiety/depression and workload (Omega 0.78). Differences from mean were expressed as Cohen's d Effect Sizes (ESs). Regression analyses tested associations with stress and burnout. FINDINGS: Between May 28 and October 1, 2020, 20,947 healthcare workers responded from 42 organizations (median response rate 20%, Interquartile range 7% to 35%). Sixty one percent reported fear of exposure or transmission, 38% reported anxiety/depression, 43% suffered work overload, and 49% had burnout. Stress scores were highest among nursing assistants, medical assistants, and social workers (small to moderate ESs, p < 0.001), inpatient vs outpatient workers (small ES, p < 0.001), women vs men (small ES, p < 0.001), and in Black and Latinx workers vs Whites (small ESs, p < 0.001). Fear of exposure was prevalent among nursing assistants and Black and Latinx workers, while housekeepers and Black and Latinx workers most often experienced enhanced meaning and purpose. In multilevel models, odds of burnout were 40% lower in those feeling valued by their organizations (odds ratio 0.60, 95% CIs [0.58, 0.63], p< 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Stress is higher among nursing assistants, medical assistants, social workers, inpatient workers, women and persons of color, is related to workload and mental health, and is lower when feeling valued.

Preliminary Report: US Physician Stress During the Early Days of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on physician stress and mental health. METHODS: The 10-item Coping With COVID survey assessed stress among 2373 physicians from April 4 to May 27, 2020. A stress summary score with 4 items (a single-item [overall] stress measure, fear of exposure, perceived anxiety/depression due to COVID, and work overload, each scored 1-4) ranged from 4 to 16. Hypothesized stress mitigators included enhanced purpose and feeling valued by one's organization. Multilevel linear regression tested associations of variables with overall stress and stress summary scores. RESULTS: In 2373 physicians in 17 organizations (median response rate of 32%), mean stress summary score was 9.1 (SD 2.6). Stress was highest among women (stress summary score, 9.4 [SD 2.5] vs 8.7 [SD 2.6] in men; P <.001), inpatient physicians (stress summary score, 9.4 [SD 2.8] vs 8.9 [SD 2.5] in outpatient physicians; P <.001), early- and mid-career physicians (stress summary score, 9.5 [SD 2.6] vs 8.6 [SD 2.5] in late-career physicians; P <.001), and physicians in critical care (stress summary score, 10.8), emergency departments (10.2), and hospital medicine (10.1). Increases in perceived anxiety/depression (regression coefficient, 0.30), workload (0.28), and fear (0.14) were associated with higher overall stress (P values <.001). Increases in feeling valued were associated with lower stress summary scores (regression coefficient, -0.67; P <.001) and explained 11% of stress summary score variance at the physician level and 31% of variance at the organizational level. CONCLUSION: Mental health support, modulation of workload, and noting physicians' organizational value should be explored as means to reduce COVID-related stress.

Deriving and validating a brief measure of treatment burden to assess person-centered healthcare quality in primary care: a multi-method study.

BACKGROUND: In primary care there is a need for more quality measures of person-centered outcomes, especially ones applicable to patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). The aim of this study was to derive and validate a short-form version of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS), an established measure of treatment burden, to help fill the gap in quality measurement. METHODS: Patient interviews (30) and provider surveys (30) were used to winnow items from the PETS (60 items) to a subset targeting person-centered care quality. Results were reviewed by a panel of healthcare providers and health-services researchers who finalized a pilot version. The Brief PETS was tested in surveys of 200 clinic and 200 community-dwelling MCC patients. Surveys containing the Brief PETS and additional measures (e.g., health status, medication adherence, quality of care, demographics) were administered at baseline and follow-up. Correlations and t-tests were used to assess validity, including responsiveness to change of the Brief PETS. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated on mean differences. RESULTS: Winnowing and panel review resulted in a 34-item Brief PETS pilot measure that was tested in the combined sample of 400 (mean age = 57.9 years, 50% female, 48% white, median number of conditions = 5). Reliability of most scales was acceptable (alpha > 0.70). Brief PETS scores were associated with age, income, health status, and quality of chronic illness care at baseline (P < .05; rho magnitude range: 0.16-0.66). Furthermore, Brief PETS scores differentiated groups based on marital and education status, presence/absence of a self-management routine, and optimal/suboptimal medication adherence (P < .05; ES range: 0.25-1.00). Declines in patient-reported physical or mental health status over time were associated with worsening PETS burden scores, while improvements were associated with improving PETS burden scores (P < .05; ES range: 0.04-0.44). Among clinic patients, 91% were willing to complete the Brief PETS as part of their clinic visits. CONCLUSIONS: The Brief PETS (final version: 32 items) is a reliable and valid tool for assessing person-centered care quality related to treatment burden. It holds promise as a means of giving voice to patient concerns about the complexity of disease management.

Time Pressure During Primary Care Office Visits: a Prospective Evaluation of Data from the Healthy Work Place Study.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between worklife factors, clinician outcomes, and time pressure during office visits is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To quantify associations between time pressure, workplace characteristics ,and clinician outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of data from the Healthy Work Place randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: 168 physicians and advanced practice clinicians in 34 primary care practices in Upper Midwest and East Coast. MAIN MEASURES AND METHODS: Time pressure was present when clinicians needed more time than allotted to provide quality care. Other metrics included work control, work pace (calm to chaotic), organizational culture and clinician satisfaction, stress, burnout, and intent to leave the practice. Hierarchical analysis assessed relationships between time pressure, organizational characteristics, and clinician outcomes. Adjusted differences between clinicians with and without time pressure were expressed as effect sizes (ESs). KEY RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of clinicians needed more time for new patients and 53% needed additional time for follow-up appointments. Time pressure in new patient visits was more prevalent in general internists than in family physicians (74% vs 55%, p < 0.05), women versus men (78% vs 55%, p < 0.01), and clinicians with larger numbers of complex psychosocial (81% vs 59%, p < 0.01) and Limited English Proficiency patients (95% vs 57%, p < 0.001). Time pressure in new patient visits was associated with lack of control, clinician stress, and intent to leave (ESs small to moderate, p < 0.05). Time pressure in follow-up visits was associated with chaotic workplaces and burnout (small to moderate ESs, p's < 0.05). Time pressure improved over time in workplaces with values alignment and an emphasis on quality. CONCLUSIONS: Time pressure, more common in women and general internists, was related to chaos, control and culture, and stress, burnout, and intent to leave. Future studies should evaluate these findings in larger and more geographically diverse samples.

Low ICU burnout in a safety net hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Burnout tends to be high in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) settings. Stressors include serious patient illness, round-the-clock acute events, and end of life (non-beneficial) care. We report on an ICU with very low burnout scores. We sought to understand factors that might be responsible for these favorable outcomes. DESIGN: We compared ICU scores on burnout and its predictors with scores in non ICU providers, merging scores in four ICUs (burn, medical, surgical and pediatrics). Analyses included descriptive statistics, as well as general estimating equations to assess odds of burnout in ICU vs non ICU clinicians. SETTING: Annual wellness survey performed in October 2017 at Hennepin Healthcare System (HHS), an integrated system of care that includes an urban safety net hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred seventy-nine providers (physicians and advanced practice providers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Annual surveys are performed using the validated Mini-Z 10 item wellness instrument. The Mini-Z assesses stress, satisfaction, and burnout, as well as known predictors including work control, chaos, teamwork, values alignment, and electronic medical record-related stress. Response rate in ICUs was 70% (64% elsewhere). Ten percent of ICU clinicians reported burnout, vs 37% of other providers (p = 0.015). ICUs were characterized as having lower chaos, less stress, and very high teamwork and values alignment between clinicians and leaders. Odds of burnout were four times lower in ICU clinicians (Odds Ratio 0.24, 95% CI 0.06, 0.96, p = 0.043). Of all HHS providers, those with values not aligned with leaders had 3.28 times the odds of burnout (CIs 1.92, 5.59, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Low burnout can be present in a busy, safety net ICU. Explicitly aligning values between clinicians and leaders may hold promise as a remediable worklife factor for producing these favorable results.