Kriti Prasad1,2,3, Sara Poplau1,2,3, Roger Brown4, Steven Yale5, Ellie Grossman6, Anita B Varkey7, Eric Williams8, Hannah Neprash9, Mark Linzer10,11,12,13. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 2. Office of Professional Worklife, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 3. Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 4. School of Nursing, UW-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 5. University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Lake Nona, Orlando, FL, USA. 6. Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge, MA, USA. 7. Loyola University Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL, USA. 8. University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA. 9. University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 10. Division of General Internal Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Mark.linzer@hcmed.org. 11. Office of Professional Worklife, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Mark.linzer@hcmed.org. 12. Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Mark.linzer@hcmed.org. 13. Department of Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, 701 Park Ave (G5), Minneapolis, MN, 55415, USA. Mark.linzer@hcmed.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between worklife factors, clinician outcomes, and time pressure during office visits is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To quantify associations between time pressure, workplace characteristics ,and clinician outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of data from the Healthy Work Place randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: 168 physicians and advanced practice clinicians in 34 primary care practices in Upper Midwest and East Coast. MAIN MEASURES AND METHODS: Time pressure was present when clinicians needed more time than allotted to provide quality care. Other metrics included work control, work pace (calm to chaotic), organizational culture and clinician satisfaction, stress, burnout, and intent to leave the practice. Hierarchical analysis assessed relationships between time pressure, organizational characteristics, and clinician outcomes. Adjusted differences between clinicians with and without time pressure were expressed as effect sizes (ESs). KEY RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of clinicians needed more time for new patients and 53% needed additional time for follow-up appointments. Time pressure in new patient visits was more prevalent in general internists than in family physicians (74% vs 55%, p < 0.05), women versus men (78% vs 55%, p < 0.01), and clinicians with larger numbers of complex psychosocial (81% vs 59%, p < 0.01) and Limited English Proficiency patients (95% vs 57%, p < 0.001). Time pressure in new patient visits was associated with lack of control, clinician stress, and intent to leave (ESs small to moderate, p < 0.05). Time pressure in follow-up visits was associated with chaotic workplaces and burnout (small to moderate ESs, p's < 0.05). Time pressure improved over time in workplaces with values alignment and an emphasis on quality. CONCLUSIONS: Time pressure, more common in women and general internists, was related to chaos, control and culture, and stress, burnout, and intent to leave. Future studies should evaluate these findings in larger and more geographically diverse samples.
BACKGROUND: The relationship between worklife factors, clinician outcomes, and time pressure during office visits is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To quantify associations between time pressure, workplace characteristics ,and clinician outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of data from the Healthy Work Place randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: 168 physicians and advanced practice clinicians in 34 primary care practices in Upper Midwest and East Coast. MAIN MEASURES AND METHODS: Time pressure was present when clinicians needed more time than allotted to provide quality care. Other metrics included work control, work pace (calm to chaotic), organizational culture and clinician satisfaction, stress, burnout, and intent to leave the practice. Hierarchical analysis assessed relationships between time pressure, organizational characteristics, and clinician outcomes. Adjusted differences between clinicians with and without time pressure were expressed as effect sizes (ESs). KEY RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of clinicians needed more time for new patients and 53% needed additional time for follow-up appointments. Time pressure in new patient visits was more prevalent in general internists than in family physicians (74% vs 55%, p < 0.05), women versus men (78% vs 55%, p < 0.01), and clinicians with larger numbers of complex psychosocial (81% vs 59%, p < 0.01) and Limited English Proficiency patients (95% vs 57%, p < 0.001). Time pressure in new patient visits was associated with lack of control, clinician stress, and intent to leave (ESs small to moderate, p < 0.05). Time pressure in follow-up visits was associated with chaotic workplaces and burnout (small to moderate ESs, p's < 0.05). Time pressure improved over time in workplaces with values alignment and an emphasis on quality. CONCLUSIONS: Time pressure, more common in women and general internists, was related to chaos, control and culture, and stress, burnout, and intent to leave. Future studies should evaluate these findings in larger and more geographically diverse samples.
Entities:
Keywords:
health services research; medical culture; physician satisfaction; primary care; time pressure; workforce
Authors: Elizabeth Trowbridge; Christie M Bartels; Steven Koslov; Sandra Kamnetz; Nancy Pandhi Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Karen E Hauer; Steven J Durning; Walter N Kernan; Mark J Fagan; Matthew Mintz; Patricia S O'Sullivan; Michael Battistone; Thomas DeFer; Michael Elnicki; Heather Harrell; Shalini Reddy; Christy K Boscardin; Mark D Schwartz Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-09-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Denise D Quigley; Nabeel Qureshi; Mary E Slaughter; Scott Kim; Efrain Talamantes; Ron D Hays Journal: J Eval Clin Pract Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Kimberly S Hsiung; Jason B Colditz; Elizabeth A McGuier; Galen E Switzer; Helena M VonVille; Barbara L Folb; David J Kolko Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Tait D Shanafelt; Hanhan Wang; Mary Leonard; Mary Hawn; Quinn McKenna; Rick Majzun; Lloyd Minor; Mickey Trockel Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-02-01
Authors: Anthony C Waddimba; Monica M Bennett; Michelle Fresnedo; Thomas G Ledbetter; Ann Marie Warren Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-09-17