Employee Dietary Initiative Improved Chronic Symptoms.

With the awareness that the Standard American Diet is a critical contributor to chronic diseases, this initiative aimed to assess the effects of a 28-day dietary challenge health care improvement project on health system employee energy level, sleep quality, gastrointestinal function, ability to concentrate, and aches/pains, including the impact of adherence level, during a period of restricted intake of gluten, dairy, and sugar offered annually from 2021 to 2023. A total of 754 employees completed the pre-challenge survey; analyses included 354 employees who completed both pre-challenge and post-challenge surveys in at least 1 year of this project. Wilcoxon signed rank tests compared presurvey and postsurvey responses to self-reported energy level, sleep quality, gastrointestinal function, ability to concentrate, and aches/pains. Analysis of variance with Tukey's honestly significant difference tests compared self-reported adherence level with change scores, with η2 representing effect size. In each challenge year, the mean rank levels of energy, sleep quality, gastrointestinal function, concentration, and aches/pains improved significantly between pre-surveys and post-surveys (all P<.001). Although an association between significant positive change and diet adherence level was found for all items in at least 1 challenge year, those who mostly or completely adhered to the challenge diet restrictions reported significantly greater positive change in energy levels and gastrointestinal symptoms than those who did not or minimally adhered in all challenge years, with small to medium effect sizes. In conclusion, Essentia Health's employee challenge appeared to improve self-reported outcomes in 5 symptom domains, with energy levels and gastrointestinal symptoms correlating most favorably to adherence to the challenge. These findings have health and cost implications, which could be confirmed by formal research in employee and other populations.

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.

CARE guidelines for case reports: explanation and elaboration document.

BACKGROUND: Well-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines, and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. During 2011-2012, a group of clinicians, researchers, and journal editors developed recommendations for the accurate reporting of information in case reports that resulted in the CARE (CAse REport) Statement and Checklist. They were presented at the 2013 International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, have been endorsed by multiple medical journals, and translated into nine languages. OBJECTIVES: This explanation and elaboration document has the objective to increase the use and dissemination of the CARE Checklist in writing and publishing case reports. ARTICLE DESIGN AND SETTING: Each item from the CARE Checklist is explained and accompanied by published examples. The explanations and examples in this document are designed to support the writing of high-quality case reports by authors and their critical appraisal by editors, peer reviewers, and readers. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: This article and the 2013 CARE Statement and Checklist, available from the CARE website [www.care-statement.org] and the EQUATOR Network [www.equator-network.org], are resources for improving the completeness and transparency of case reports.