4 research outputs found

    Team and leadership factors and their relationship to burnout in emergency medicine during COVID-19: A 3-wave cross-sectional study.

    No full text
    ObjectiveWe examined the relationship of team and leadership attributes with clinician feelings of burnout over time during the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsWe surveyed emergency medicine personnel at 2 California hospitals at 3 time points: July 2020, December 2020, and November 2021. We assessed 3 team and leadership attributes using previously validated psychological scales (joint problem-solving, process clarity, and leader inclusiveness) and burnout using a validated scale. Using logistic regression models we determined the associations between team and leadership attributes and burnout, controlling for covariates.ResultsWe obtained responses from 328, 356, and 260 respondents in waves 1, 2, and 3, respectively (mean response rate = 49.52%). The median response for feelings of burnout increased over time (2.0, interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0-3.0 in wave 1 to 3.0, IQR = 2.0-3.0 in wave 3). At all time points, greater process clarity was associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.36 [0.19, 0.66] in wave 1 to 0.24 [0.10, 0.61] in wave 3). In waves 2 and 3, greater joint problem-solving was associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (OR [95% CI] = 0.61 [0.42, 0.89], 0.54 [0.33, 0.88]). Leader inclusiveness was also associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (OR [95% CI] = 0.45 [0.27, 0.74] in wave 1 to 0.41 [0.24, 0.69] in wave 3).ConclusionsProcess clarity, joint problem-solving, and leader inclusiveness are associated with less clinician burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic, pointing to potential benefits of focusing on team and leadership factors during crisis. Leader inclusiveness may wane over time, requiring effort to sustain

    Unprecedented Training: Experience of Residents During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted both the clinical training and personal lives of our next generation of Emergency Medicine leaders: resident physicians. The challenges and successes experienced by residents during the pandemic will likely shape the future of the field. LITERATURE REVIEW: Over a year from the start of the pandemic, studies are exploring how COVID-19 affected trainees, particularly in four areas: clinical training, didactic education, board certification, and physical and psychological health. While posing significant challenges for residents, the pressures of the pandemic also spurred accelerated innovation in graduate medical education that will likely have positive impacts for future learners. INSIGHT FROM THE FIELD: Our team explores how residents experienced the crisis through two critical components of well-being and career longevity: burnout and adaptation. While residents’ perceived burnout increased throughout the pandemic, many EM residents exhibited high levels of adaptation, which enabled them to continue honing their clinical skills and providing high quality care for patients. LOOKING FORWARD: The COVID-19 pandemic forced the next generation of Emergency Medicine leaders to innovate, adapt, and act resourcefully. While they are certainly weary from the experience, residents demonstrated that the future leaders of the specialty – and the prospects of the field itself – are bright

    How psychological safety and feeling heard relate to burnout and adaptation amid uncertainty

    No full text
    BackgroundPsychological safety-the belief that it is safe to speak up-is vital amid uncertainty, but its relationship to feeling heard is not well understood.PurposeThe aims of this study were (a) to measure feeling heard and (b) to assess how psychological safety and feeling heard relate to one another as well as to burnout, worsening burnout, and adaptation during uncertainty.MethodologyWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of emergency department staff and clinicians (response rate = 52%; analytic N = 241) in July 2020. The survey measured psychological safety, feeling heard, overall burnout, worsening burnout, and perceived process adaptation during the COVID-19 crisis. We assessed descriptive statistics and construct measurement properties, and we assessed relationships among the variables using generalized structural equation modeling.ResultsPsychological safety and feeling heard demonstrated acceptable measurement properties and were correlated at r = .54. Levels of feeling heard were lower on average than psychological safety. Psychological safety and feeling heard were both statistically significantly associated with lower burnout and greater process adaptation. Only psychological safety exhibited a statistically significant relationship with less worsening burnout during crisis. We found evidence that feeling heard mediates psychological safety's relationship to burnout and process adaptation.ConclusionPsychological safety is important but not sufficient for feeling heard. Feeling heard may help mitigate burnout and enable adaptation during uncertainty.Practice implicationsFor health care leaders, expanding beyond psychological safety to also establish a feeling of being heard may further reduce burnout and improve care processes
    corecore