透过窗帘看世界:了解外科医生和麻醉师职业倦怠的新颖质量改进方法。

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Annals of surgery Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006241
Jina L Sinskey, Rachel Schwartz, Christy K Boscardin, Joyce M Chang, Sandhya B Kumar, Carter C Lebares
{"title":"透过窗帘看世界:了解外科医生和麻醉师职业倦怠的新颖质量改进方法。","authors":"Jina L Sinskey, Rachel Schwartz, Christy K Boscardin, Joyce M Chang, Sandhya B Kumar, Carter C Lebares","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify well-being threats for surgeons and anesthesiologists and develop interventions using the quality of life improvement (QOLI) approach.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Developing feasible perioperative well-being interventions requires identifying shared and specialty-specific well-being needs. The QOLI framework integrates human-centered design, implementation science, and quality improvement to address well-being needs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Anesthesia and surgery faculty in 8 perioperative departments at an academic medical center completed cross-sectional surveys containing validated measures of well-being and workplace satisfaction, and open-ended questions about professional motivations, pain points, strategies for improvement, and well-being priorities. Using template analysis, we analyzed open-ended survey data and presented resulting themes at a joint-specialty town hall for live voting to identify well-being priorities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred four perioperative faculty completed the survey. Across specialties, higher Mental Health Continuum-Short Form scores (representative of individual global well-being) were associated with higher satisfaction with workplace control, values, decision latitude, and social support. Anesthesiologists reported lower satisfaction and control than surgeons across multiple domains. Template analysis yielded 5 areas for intervention: (1) work culture, (2) work environment/resources, (3) sources of fulfillment, (4) work/life harmony, and (5) financial compensation. Surgeons and anesthesiologists both prioritized high-quality patient care but differed in their other top priorities. The most frequently cited well-being threats for surgeons were operating room inefficiencies/delays and excessive workload, whereas anesthesiologists cited understaffing and unpredictable work hours.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgeons and anesthesiologists share many needs and priorities, with pain points that are often negatively synergistic. Applying the QOLI approach across specialties allows for well-being interventions that honor complexity and promote the development of feasible solutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":" ","pages":"e2-e7"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Looking Across the Drape: A Novel Quality Improvement Approach to Understanding Surgeon and Anesthesiologist Burnout.\",\"authors\":\"Jina L Sinskey, Rachel Schwartz, Christy K Boscardin, Joyce M Chang, Sandhya B Kumar, Carter C Lebares\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify well-being threats for surgeons and anesthesiologists and develop interventions using the quality of life improvement (QOLI) approach.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Developing feasible perioperative well-being interventions requires identifying shared and specialty-specific well-being needs. The QOLI framework integrates human-centered design, implementation science, and quality improvement to address well-being needs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Anesthesia and surgery faculty in 8 perioperative departments at an academic medical center completed cross-sectional surveys containing validated measures of well-being and workplace satisfaction, and open-ended questions about professional motivations, pain points, strategies for improvement, and well-being priorities. Using template analysis, we analyzed open-ended survey data and presented resulting themes at a joint-specialty town hall for live voting to identify well-being priorities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred four perioperative faculty completed the survey. Across specialties, higher Mental Health Continuum-Short Form scores (representative of individual global well-being) were associated with higher satisfaction with workplace control, values, decision latitude, and social support. Anesthesiologists reported lower satisfaction and control than surgeons across multiple domains. Template analysis yielded 5 areas for intervention: (1) work culture, (2) work environment/resources, (3) sources of fulfillment, (4) work/life harmony, and (5) financial compensation. Surgeons and anesthesiologists both prioritized high-quality patient care but differed in their other top priorities. The most frequently cited well-being threats for surgeons were operating room inefficiencies/delays and excessive workload, whereas anesthesiologists cited understaffing and unpredictable work hours.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgeons and anesthesiologists share many needs and priorities, with pain points that are often negatively synergistic. Applying the QOLI approach across specialties allows for well-being interventions that honor complexity and promote the development of feasible solutions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e2-e7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006241\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006241","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要确定对外科医生和麻醉师福祉的威胁,并采用提高生活质量(QOLI)的方法制定干预措施:背景:制定可行的围手术期福利干预措施需要确定共同的和特定专业的福利需求。QOLI 框架整合了以人为本的设计、实施科学和质量改进,以满足福利需求:一家学术医疗中心八个围手术期科室的麻醉和外科教员完成了横断面调查,调查内容包括经过验证的幸福感和工作场所满意度测量方法,以及有关职业动机、痛点、改进策略和幸福感优先事项的开放式问题。通过模板分析法,我们对开放式调查数据进行了分析,并在联合专科全体会议上提出了由此产生的主题,供现场投票确定福利优先事项:结果:104 名围手术期教师完成了调查。在各专科中,较高的 MHC-SF 分数(代表个人的总体幸福感)与较高的工作场所控制满意度、价值观、决策空间和社会支持有关。麻醉科医生在多个领域的满意度和控制力均低于外科医生。模板分析得出了五个需要干预的领域:(1)工作文化;(2)工作环境/资源;(3)成就感的来源;(4)工作/生活的和谐;(5)经济补偿。外科医生和麻醉科医生都将高质量的患者护理放在首位,但在其他首要任务方面却有所不同。外科医生最常提到的福利威胁是手术室效率低下/延误和工作量过大,而麻醉医生则提到人手不足和工作时间不可预测:结论:外科医生和麻醉师有许多共同的需求和优先事项,其痛点往往具有负面协同作用。将 QOLI 方法应用于各专科,可以进行福利干预,尊重复杂性并促进制定可行的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Looking Across the Drape: A Novel Quality Improvement Approach to Understanding Surgeon and Anesthesiologist Burnout.

Objective: To identify well-being threats for surgeons and anesthesiologists and develop interventions using the quality of life improvement (QOLI) approach.

Background: Developing feasible perioperative well-being interventions requires identifying shared and specialty-specific well-being needs. The QOLI framework integrates human-centered design, implementation science, and quality improvement to address well-being needs.

Methods: Anesthesia and surgery faculty in 8 perioperative departments at an academic medical center completed cross-sectional surveys containing validated measures of well-being and workplace satisfaction, and open-ended questions about professional motivations, pain points, strategies for improvement, and well-being priorities. Using template analysis, we analyzed open-ended survey data and presented resulting themes at a joint-specialty town hall for live voting to identify well-being priorities.

Results: One hundred four perioperative faculty completed the survey. Across specialties, higher Mental Health Continuum-Short Form scores (representative of individual global well-being) were associated with higher satisfaction with workplace control, values, decision latitude, and social support. Anesthesiologists reported lower satisfaction and control than surgeons across multiple domains. Template analysis yielded 5 areas for intervention: (1) work culture, (2) work environment/resources, (3) sources of fulfillment, (4) work/life harmony, and (5) financial compensation. Surgeons and anesthesiologists both prioritized high-quality patient care but differed in their other top priorities. The most frequently cited well-being threats for surgeons were operating room inefficiencies/delays and excessive workload, whereas anesthesiologists cited understaffing and unpredictable work hours.

Conclusions: Surgeons and anesthesiologists share many needs and priorities, with pain points that are often negatively synergistic. Applying the QOLI approach across specialties allows for well-being interventions that honor complexity and promote the development of feasible solutions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of surgery
Annals of surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
4.40%
发文量
687
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.
×
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