MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3211189409 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab061.104

130 Adaptation of IHI Joy-in-Work framework to reduce burnout among postgraduate trainees

2021· article· en· W3211189409 on OpenAlexaff
Zheng Hu, Gerhard Fusch, Salhab el Helou, Lehana Thabane, Teresa M. Chan, Enas El Gouhary

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutPsychological interventionWorkloadAutonomyMindfulnessNursingMedicineHealth carePsychological resilienceMental healthPsychologyMedical educationClinical psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary Subject area Physician Wellness Background Physician burnout is a psychological phenomenon with serious and pervasive consequences on physicians’ mental health, patient safety, and quality of care. Burnout is multifactorial, originating from systemic issues, organizational culture and individual coping skills. Burnout is more common in residency training. Residents experience burnout more intensely due to lack of autonomy, self-efficacy and exposure to mistreatment. Residents are also frontline workers and the future healthcare givers. Organization-led interventions mostly focus on building resilience and mindfulness without addressing systems-level issues. In our study, we attempted to shift the paradigm to address system-level concerns first. We aimed to adapt Joy-in-Work: a quality improvement framework developed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI). This program allows residents to identify system problems that are meaningful to them and empower them to work as a team, taking back their autonomy and self-efficacy. Objectives To demonstrate that Joy-in-Work can be adapted effectively into a residency training program to reduce burnout and improve psychological safety among residents. Design/Methods The four steps of Joy-in-Work were implemented for residents in a level 3 neonatal intensive care unit. Residents engaged in “what matters” conversations through survey and group meetings, and identified impediments to Joy-in-Work. By applying QI methodology, residents identified priority interventions to eliminate impediments. Finally, the effectiveness of interventions was evaluated. Primary outcomes included prevalence of burnout and psychological safety; secondary outcomes assessed control over workload, and organizational culture. An IHI 12-item questionnaire was administered at baseline and after the interventions. To assess sustainability, a survey was also conducted one year after the implementation. We assessed adherence to interventions, nurse practitioners’ satisfaction and residents’ workload indicators. Results Through the implementation of Joy-in-Work, residents identified autonomy and work life integration as priorities. Stakeholders developed two interventions: change call schedule according to residents’ preferences and earlier afternoon handover time. Burnout was 77.8%, 50% and 75% for three survey periods respectively. Psychological safety increased consistently from 16.7% to 37.5% to 43.8%. Lack of control over workload dropped sharply from 72.2% to 12.5%, with a rebound to 56.3%. Most secondary outcomes demonstrated a similar pattern of positive change initially with reversion to baseline. Conclusion We demonstrated that Joy-in-Work is successfully adaptable into a residency setting. Implementation through residents’ engagement and empowerment can decrease burnout and improve psychological safety significantly. The process itself was likely the key driver for achieving positive outcomes rather than the actual interventions. Sustainability remains a key issue that requires systems support.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units→French-language works237,207→