Toward better prevention of physician burnout: insights from individual participant data using the MD-specific Occupational Stressor Index and organizational interventions.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Frontiers in Public Health Pub Date : 2025-03-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1514706
Karen Belkić
{"title":"Toward better prevention of physician burnout: insights from individual participant data using the MD-specific Occupational Stressor Index and organizational interventions.","authors":"Karen Belkić","doi":"10.3389/fpubh.2025.1514706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Physician burnout has become a public-health crisis. The need is dire for robust organizational solutions, focusing on reduction of specific stressors. The physician-specific Occupational Stressor Index (OSI) based on cognitive ergonomics can help. Individual-participant data (IPD) from different studies addressing physician burnout are lacking.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To perform IPD analysis regarding job stressors and their relation to physician burnout and to utilize the IPD results to inform a systematic review of the stressors that show an association with physician burnout, focusing on intervention studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PRISMA guidelines are followed for the IPD analysis and systematic review of intervention studies on the implicated stressors, taking the COVID-19 pandemic into consideration. The IPD analysis is performed on studies using the physician-specific OSI vis-à-vis burnout assessed by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). Odds ratios (OR) ± 95% confidence-intervals (CI) are reported, adjusting for age, gender and caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, providing complete IPD data for 95 physicians. Thirty-two (33.7%) physicians had total OSI scores >88, for which intervention is urgently needed. Unit-change in the total stressor burden assessed via OSI yielded OR = 1.11 (95%CI: 1.03-1.18) (<i>p</i> = 0.003) for personal burnout, OR = 1.17 (95%CI: 1.08-1.26) (<i>p</i> = 0.0001) for work-related burnout and OR = 1.07 (95%CI: 1.01-1.15) (<i>p</i> = 0.03) for patient-related burnout. Caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection showed significant multivariable results (<i>p</i> = 0.04) only for personal burnout. Twenty distinct work stressors revealed multivariable associations with CBI. Systematic examination via PUBMED, CINAHL and OVID Medline yielded 33 publications mitigating those stressors among physicians. Adequate staffing was pivotal. Clerical staff off-loaded administrative burden. Information-technology staff helped diminish interruptions, enhancing workflow. Cross-coverage reduced time constraints, ensured separate periods for non-clinical tasks, and ≥1 work-free day/week. Several interventions impacted physician burnout, as did recognition of physicians' efforts/achievements. Other OSI-identified stressors were insufficiently examined in intervention studies: e.g. vacation; appropriately-timed, cross-covered restbreaks; and counter-measures for emotionally-disturbing aspects of MD's work, particularly during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Further participatory-action research is needed in well-controlled intervention trials to alleviate physician burnout.</p>","PeriodicalId":12548,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Public Health","volume":"13 ","pages":"1514706"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11961930/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1514706","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Physician burnout has become a public-health crisis. The need is dire for robust organizational solutions, focusing on reduction of specific stressors. The physician-specific Occupational Stressor Index (OSI) based on cognitive ergonomics can help. Individual-participant data (IPD) from different studies addressing physician burnout are lacking.

Aims: To perform IPD analysis regarding job stressors and their relation to physician burnout and to utilize the IPD results to inform a systematic review of the stressors that show an association with physician burnout, focusing on intervention studies.

Methods: PRISMA guidelines are followed for the IPD analysis and systematic review of intervention studies on the implicated stressors, taking the COVID-19 pandemic into consideration. The IPD analysis is performed on studies using the physician-specific OSI vis-à-vis burnout assessed by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). Odds ratios (OR) ± 95% confidence-intervals (CI) are reported, adjusting for age, gender and caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection.

Results: Three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, providing complete IPD data for 95 physicians. Thirty-two (33.7%) physicians had total OSI scores >88, for which intervention is urgently needed. Unit-change in the total stressor burden assessed via OSI yielded OR = 1.11 (95%CI: 1.03-1.18) (p = 0.003) for personal burnout, OR = 1.17 (95%CI: 1.08-1.26) (p = 0.0001) for work-related burnout and OR = 1.07 (95%CI: 1.01-1.15) (p = 0.03) for patient-related burnout. Caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection showed significant multivariable results (p = 0.04) only for personal burnout. Twenty distinct work stressors revealed multivariable associations with CBI. Systematic examination via PUBMED, CINAHL and OVID Medline yielded 33 publications mitigating those stressors among physicians. Adequate staffing was pivotal. Clerical staff off-loaded administrative burden. Information-technology staff helped diminish interruptions, enhancing workflow. Cross-coverage reduced time constraints, ensured separate periods for non-clinical tasks, and ≥1 work-free day/week. Several interventions impacted physician burnout, as did recognition of physicians' efforts/achievements. Other OSI-identified stressors were insufficiently examined in intervention studies: e.g. vacation; appropriately-timed, cross-covered restbreaks; and counter-measures for emotionally-disturbing aspects of MD's work, particularly during the pandemic.

Conclusions: Further participatory-action research is needed in well-controlled intervention trials to alleviate physician burnout.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Public Health
Frontiers in Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
4469
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Public Health is a multidisciplinary open-access journal which publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research and is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians, policy makers and the public worldwide. The journal aims at overcoming current fragmentation in research and publication, promoting consistency in pursuing relevant scientific themes, and supporting finding dissemination and translation into practice. Frontiers in Public Health is organized into Specialty Sections that cover different areas of research in the field. Please refer to the author guidelines for details on article types and the submission process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信