Objectives The aim was to investigate which factors influence the situational motivation of medical specialists and how situational and contextual motivation affect one another. Methods A qualitative design was used, and a constructivist approach was adopted with the Self-Determination Theory of motivation as a framework. Twenty-two medical specialists from three medical centers in the Netherlands were recruited through convenience, snowball and purposive sampling and observed for two days each. At the end of the second observation day, a semi-structured interview was conducted. Data were transcribed and coded in an open manner. Themes were finalized through discussion and consensus. Results Two-hundred and fifty hours of observation data together with the interview data identified that medical specialists experience six main themes influencing their situational motivation during a workday. Technical issues are influencing motivation negatively factors. Working with colleagues can be both a motivating factor and influence motivation negatively, e.g., filling in for each other through feelings of relatedness was motivating. Being in control of one’s own planning through feelings of autonomy was motivating. Patient care, especially in combination with teaching, stimulated specialists’ motivation. Conclusions The results indicate that factors influencing motivation negatively are mainly tasks and organizational processes that distract from patient care or that compromise the quality of care. When optimizing the work environment of medical specialists, autonomous motivation and continuing professional development are stimulated.  These, in turn, can improve the quality of patient care and wellbeing of specialists.

No abstract

ObjectivePsychiatric comorbidities are common in physical illness and significantly affect health outcomes. Attitudes of general hospital doctors toward psychiatry are important as they influence referral patterns and quality of care. Little is known about these attitudes and their cultural correlates. The aim of this study was to identify attitudes toward psychiatry among general hospital specialists in relation to culture of the practice setting and other clinician factors (gender, age, seniority and specialty).MethodsA cross-sectional, descriptive study was carried out in seven countries (New Zealand, China, Sri Lanka, Russia, Israel, Brazil, the Netherlands). Data were collected from senior medical staff of various disciplines using an updated version of Mayou and Smith’s (1986) self-administered questionnaire.ResultsA total of 889 hospital doctors participated. While favourable attitudes toward both psychiatric consultation and management were endorsed by a majority, significant differences were also observed between countries. Subgroup differences were mostly confined to gender, acuity of practice setting and specialty. For example, female doctors in Russia (χ2=7.7, p=0.0056), China (χ2=9.2, p=0.0025) and the Netherlands (χ2=5.7, p=0.0174) endorsed more positive attitudes compared with their male counterparts, but this gender effect was not replicated in the total sample. Chronic care specialists were overall more inclined to manage patients’ emotional problems compared with those working in acute care (χ2=70.8, p (adjusted)<0.0001), a significant finding seen also in individual countries (China, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Russia). Physicians were more favourably disposed toward psychiatry compared with other specialists, especially surgeons, in all countries except Israel.ConclusionsThis study adds to evidence for the association of medical attitudes with individual clinician factors and demonstrates that the influence of these factors varies by country. Understanding these issues may help to overcome barriers and improve quality of care provided to general hospital patients.

No abstract