51. Building physician wellness into the culture: evaluating a family physician well-being programme using the physician wellness inventory.
- Author
-
Clay TL, Mabachi NM, and Callen EF
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Surveys and Questionnaires, Job Satisfaction, Adult, Middle Aged, Program Evaluation, Burnout, Professional prevention & control, Health Promotion methods, Physicians, Family psychology
- Abstract
Purpose: Family physicians have a higher incidence of burnout, dissatisfaction, and disengagement compared to other medical specialties. Addressing burnout on the individual and systemic level is important to promoting wellness and preventing deleterious effects on physicians and patients. We used the Physician Wellness Inventory (PWI) to assess the effects of a wellness programme designed to equip family physicians with skills to address burnout., Methods: The PWI is a fourteen-item 5-point Likert scale broken down into 3 scores; (i) career purpose, (ii) cognitive flexibility, and (iii) distress. The PWI was distributed to a cohort of n = 111 family physician scholars at 3 time points: January 2021, May-June 2021, and October 2021. The response rate was 96.4% at baseline, and 72.1% overall. Demographic information was collected to assess differences. The survey was distributed online through Qualtrics (Provo, UT)., Results: Cognitive Flexibility scores at the endpoint were higher for POC scholars than white scholars (P = 0.024). Distress scores for all groups decreased over time. Female scholars were more nervous, and anxious at the start than male scholars (P = 0.012), which decreased over time (P = 0.022). New career scholars were more likely than later career scholars to be distressed (P = 0.007), but both groups' distress decreased over time (P = 0.003). Later career scholars' feelings of being bothered by little interest or pleasure in doing things decreased more than new career scholars (endpoint: P = 0.022; overall: P = 0.023)., Conclusions: The wellness programme shows improvement in PWI scores, indicating the programme content should be evaluated further for system level improvements., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF