OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the satisfaction of members of an academic department who are funded by a Clinical Academic Service Contract (CASC), compared with those who are not. METHODS: We mailed a satisfaction questionnaire designed to examine surgeons' perceived effect of CASCs on their participation in their division or department and on professional activities (research, teaching, clinical) to members of the surgery department who perform operative interventions. We analyzed responses from CASC and non-CASC members, using t tests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. RESULTS: Four of 9 operative divisions (cardiac, thoracic, neurosurgery, pediatric surgery) are CASC-funded, and 5 are not (general, plastic, otolaryngology, urology, vascular). The response rate after 3 mailings was 59%. CASC responders agreed on the need for the following: improved focus and resolution of issues (p < 0.001, p < 0.02); focus on developmental and future planning (p < 0.001); flexibility to change the level of participation in research, teaching and clinical activities (p < 0.001); recognition for academic and administrative activities (p < 0.002); opportunities to achieve career path goals (p < 0.002); more autonomy in research (p < 0.04); compensation for professional activities (p < 0.001); and increased leisure time (p < 0.004). Responders disagreed that morale was low (p < 0.001). They were satisfied with the following: professional activities (p < 0.019), increased research activities (p < 0.001), quality of research (p < 0.001), more presentations (p < 0.025), increased teaching time (p < 0.004) and ability to care for their patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: CASC responders were significantly more satisfied with their professional activities and more optimistic in their divisional roles than were non-CASC responders. Based on these results, all departmental members who perform operative interventions should consider being on a CASC.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the satisfaction of members of an academic department who are funded by a Clinical Academic Service Contract (CASC), compared with those who are not. METHODS: We mailed a satisfaction questionnaire designed to examine surgeons' perceived effect of CASCs on their participation in their division or department and on professional activities (research, teaching, clinical) to members of the surgery department who perform operative interventions. We analyzed responses from CASC and non-CASC members, using t tests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. RESULTS: Four of 9 operative divisions (cardiac, thoracic, neurosurgery, pediatric surgery) are CASC-funded, and 5 are not (general, plastic, otolaryngology, urology, vascular). The response rate after 3 mailings was 59%. CASC responders agreed on the need for the following: improved focus and resolution of issues (p < 0.001, p < 0.02); focus on developmental and future planning (p < 0.001); flexibility to change the level of participation in research, teaching and clinical activities (p < 0.001); recognition for academic and administrative activities (p < 0.002); opportunities to achieve career path goals (p < 0.002); more autonomy in research (p < 0.04); compensation for professional activities (p < 0.001); and increased leisure time (p < 0.004). Responders disagreed that morale was low (p < 0.001). They were satisfied with the following: professional activities (p < 0.019), increased research activities (p < 0.001), quality of research (p < 0.001), more presentations (p < 0.025), increased teaching time (p < 0.004) and ability to care for their patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: CASC responders were significantly more satisfied with their professional activities and more optimistic in their divisional roles than were non-CASC responders. Based on these results, all departmental members who perform operative interventions should consider being on a CASC.
Authors: F H French; J E Andrew; M Awramenko; H Coutts; L Leighton-Beck; J Mollison; G Needham; A Scott; K A Walker Journal: Scott Med J Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 0.729