Lorenzo Madrazo, Jade Choo-Foo, Wenhui Yu, Kori A LaDonna, Marie-Cécile Domecq, Susan Humphrey-Murto
{"title":"Going to work sick: A scoping review of illness presenteeism among physicians and medical trainees.","authors":"Lorenzo Madrazo, Jade Choo-Foo, Wenhui Yu, Kori A LaDonna, Marie-Cécile Domecq, Susan Humphrey-Murto","doi":"10.1111/medu.15538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Illness presenteeism (IP)-characterized by individuals working despite being sick-is a prevalent and complex phenomenon among physicians and trainees amidst competing priorities within medicine. The COVID-19 pandemic and growing attention to physician and trainee well-being have sparked renewed interest in IP. We conducted a scoping review to explore what is known about IP: more specifically, how IP is perceived, what approaches have been used to study the phenomenon and how it might have changed through the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework was used to systematically select and summarize the literature. Searches were conducted across four databases: Medline, Embase, PsycInfo and Web of Science. Quantitative and thematic analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 4277 articles screened, 45 were included. Of these, four were published after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. All studies framed IP as problematic for physicians, patients and health care systems. Dominant sociocultural drivers of IP included obligations towards patients and colleagues and avoiding the stigma of appearing vulnerable or even temporarily weak. Structural factors included heavy workload, poor access to health services and lack of sick leave policies for physicians. The pandemic does not appear to have affected IP-related causes or behaviours. Proposed solutions included both educational interventions and policy-driven changes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite being viewed in the literature as largely negative, IP remains highly prevalent among physicians and trainees. Our review highlights that IP among physicians is fraught with tensions: while IP seemingly contradicts certain priorities such as physician wellbeing, IP may be justified by fulfilling obligations to patients and colleagues. Future work should examine IP through diverse theoretical lenses to further elucidate its complexities and inform nuanced individual and systems-level interventions to minimize the negative consequences of IP.</p>","PeriodicalId":18370,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15538","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Illness presenteeism (IP)-characterized by individuals working despite being sick-is a prevalent and complex phenomenon among physicians and trainees amidst competing priorities within medicine. The COVID-19 pandemic and growing attention to physician and trainee well-being have sparked renewed interest in IP. We conducted a scoping review to explore what is known about IP: more specifically, how IP is perceived, what approaches have been used to study the phenomenon and how it might have changed through the COVID-19 pandemic.
Method: The Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework was used to systematically select and summarize the literature. Searches were conducted across four databases: Medline, Embase, PsycInfo and Web of Science. Quantitative and thematic analyses were conducted.
Results: Of 4277 articles screened, 45 were included. Of these, four were published after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. All studies framed IP as problematic for physicians, patients and health care systems. Dominant sociocultural drivers of IP included obligations towards patients and colleagues and avoiding the stigma of appearing vulnerable or even temporarily weak. Structural factors included heavy workload, poor access to health services and lack of sick leave policies for physicians. The pandemic does not appear to have affected IP-related causes or behaviours. Proposed solutions included both educational interventions and policy-driven changes.
Conclusions: Despite being viewed in the literature as largely negative, IP remains highly prevalent among physicians and trainees. Our review highlights that IP among physicians is fraught with tensions: while IP seemingly contradicts certain priorities such as physician wellbeing, IP may be justified by fulfilling obligations to patients and colleagues. Future work should examine IP through diverse theoretical lenses to further elucidate its complexities and inform nuanced individual and systems-level interventions to minimize the negative consequences of IP.
背景:疾病缺勤(IP)是指个人在生病的情况下仍在工作,这在医生和受训人员中是一个普遍而复杂的现象,因为医学界的优先事项相互竞争。COVID-19 大流行以及对医生和受训人员福祉的日益关注再次引发了人们对 IP 的兴趣。我们进行了一次范围综述,以探究人们对 IP 的认识:更具体地说,人们如何看待 IP,使用了哪些方法来研究 IP 现象,以及 IP 在 COVID-19 大流行中可能发生的变化:方法:采用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 综述框架系统地选择和总结文献。在四个数据库中进行了检索:Medline、Embase、PsycInfo 和 Web of Science。结果:在筛选出的 4277 篇文章中,有 45 篇被收录。结果:在筛选出的 4277 篇文章中,有 45 篇被收录,其中 4 篇发表于 COVID-19 大流行之后。所有研究都将 IP 定义为医生、患者和医疗保健系统面临的问题。社会文化方面的主要驱动因素包括对病人和同事的义务,以及避免因显得脆弱甚至暂时软弱而蒙受耻辱。结构性因素包括繁重的工作量、难以获得医疗服务以及缺乏针对医生的病假政策。大流行似乎并没有影响与 IP 相关的原因或行为。建议的解决方案包括教育干预和政策驱动的变革:尽管在文献中被认为是负面的,但 IP 在医生和受训人员中仍然非常普遍。我们的综述突出表明,医生的职业行为充满了矛盾:虽然职业行为似乎与某些优先事项(如医生的福利)相矛盾,但职业行为也可能因为要履行对病人和同事的义务而变得合理。未来的工作应通过不同的理论视角来研究 IP,以进一步阐明其复杂性,并为个人和系统层面的干预措施提供依据,从而将 IP 的负面影响降至最低。
期刊介绍:
Medical Education seeks to be the pre-eminent journal in the field of education for health care professionals, and publishes material of the highest quality, reflecting world wide or provocative issues and perspectives.
The journal welcomes high quality papers on all aspects of health professional education including;
-undergraduate education
-postgraduate training
-continuing professional development
-interprofessional education