Quality of Life and Working Conditions of Plastic Surgeons and Trainees: A National Survey.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background While the well-being and working conditions of healthcare professionals are increasingly scrutinized, there remains a critical research gap regarding the quality of life and job satisfaction of plastic surgeons in Switzerland. No prior national study has systematically examined these aspects within this specialty.Objective This study aims to address this gap by evaluating workload, career satisfaction, and quality of life among Swiss plastic surgeons and trainees, thereby providing evidence to inform systemic improvements in the profession.Methods A national, multilingual online survey was distributed to all members of the Swiss Society for Plastic Surgery and the Association of Young Plastic Surgeons. A total of 102 plastic surgeons responded (response rate: 22.7%). The survey assessed contractual versus actual working hours, work performed during personal time, mental health indicators (e.g., burnout), and career satisfaction. Descriptive and correlational analyses were conducted.Results The respondents reported an average of 58 actual versus 49 contractual working hours per week, with an additional 8.1 h spent working during leisure time. Burnout symptoms were present in 29%, and 63% experienced work-related stress during their free time. While 42% wished to reduce their workload, 88.7% would still choose the profession again. Career satisfaction averaged 3.66/5, although 35% rated their salary as inadequate. Notably, 79.8% reported work negatively affecting private relationships, despite 82.65% feeling supported by their environment.Conclusion This first nationwide assessment highlights the high workload and psychological strain faced by Swiss plastic surgeons. Key priorities include targeted burnout prevention, structural workload reduction, enhanced support for work-life integration (especially among women and younger surgeons), and improved compensation. These measures are essential to sustain the well-being of practitioners and ensure long-term quality in surgical care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".