Background: COVID-19 has put extraordinary stress on healthcare workers. Few studies have evaluated stress by worker role, or focused on experiences of women and people of color. Methods: The "Coping with COVID" survey assessed US healthcare worker stress. A stress summary score (SSS) incorporated stress, fear of exposure, anxiety/depression and workload (Omega 0.78). Differences from mean were expressed as Cohen's d Effect Sizes (ESs). Regression analyses tested associations with stress and burnout. Findings: Between May 28 and October 1, 2020, 20,947 healthcare workers responded from 42 organizations (median response rate 20%, Interquartile range 7% to 35%). Sixty one percent reported fear of exposure or transmission, 38% reported anxiety/depression, 43% suffered work overload, and 49% had burnout. Stress scores were highest among nursing assistants, medical assistants, and social workers (small to moderate ESs, p < 0.001), inpatient vs outpatient workers (small ES, p < 0.001), women vs men (small ES, p < 0.001), and in Black and Latinx workers vs Whites (small ESs, p < 0.001). Fear of exposure was prevalent among nursing assistants and Black and Latinx workers, while housekeepers and Black and Latinx workers most often experienced enhanced meaning and purpose. In multilevel models, odds of burnout were 40% lower in those feeling valued by their organizations (odds ratio 0.60, 95% CIs [0.58, 0.63], p< 0.001). Interpretation: Stress is higher among nursing assistants, medical assistants, social workers, inpatient workers, women and persons of color, is related to workload and mental health, and is lower when feeling valued.

BACKGROUND: Work conditions in primary care are associated with physician burnout and lower quality of care. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess if improvements in work conditions improve clinician stress and burnout. SUBJECTS: Primary care clinicians at 34 clinics in the upper Midwest and New York City participated in the study. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cluster randomized controlled trial. MEASURES: Work conditions, such as time pressure, workplace chaos, and work control, as well as clinician outcomes, were measured at baseline and at 12-18 months. A brief worklife and work conditions summary measure was provided to staff and clinicians at intervention sites. INTERVENTIONS: Diverse interventions were grouped into three categories: 1) improved communication; 2) changes in workflow, and 3) targeted quality improvement (QI) projects. ANALYSIS: Multilevel regressions assessed impact of worklife data and interventions on clinician outcomes. A multilevel analysis then looked at clinicians whose outcome scores improved and determined types of interventions associated with improvement. RESULTS: Of 166 clinicians, 135 (81.3 %) completed the study. While there was no group treatment effect of baseline data on clinician outcomes, more intervention clinicians showed improvements in burnout (21.8 % vs 7.1 % less burned out, p=0.01) and satisfaction (23.1 % vs 10.0 % more satisfied, p=0.04). Burnout was more likely to improve with workflow interventions [Odds Ratio (OR) of improvement in burnout 5.9, p=0.02], and with targeted QI projects than in controls (OR 4.8, p=0.02). Interventions in communication or workflow led to greater improvements in clinician satisfaction (OR 3.1, p=0.04), and showed a trend toward greater improvement in intention to leave (OR 4.2, p=0.06). LIMITATIONS:We used heterogeneous intervention types, and were uncertain how well interventions were instituted. CONCLUSIONS: Organizations may be able to improve burnout, dissatisfaction and retention by addressing communication and workflow, and initiating QI projects targeting clinician concerns.KEY WORDS: burnout; primary care; quality improvement; work conditions.

Background:The culture of medical group practices is gaining increasing attention as one of the most important organizational factors influencing the costs and quality of health care. Based on organizational theory, we propose that the culture of the practice differs depending on size, ownership, location, and the number of medical specialties.Methods: A survey was sent to 1223 physicians in 191 clinics in the upper Midwest. The clinic response rate was 77%. The survey instrument identifies 9 culture dimensions, each with 3 to 6 measurement statements.Results: Smaller clinics had higher scores on 6 of the 9 dimensions. Physician-owned clinics had higher scores on 4 of the 9 dimensions, whereas system-owned clinics had a higher score on only 1 dimension. Only 1 dimension differed among the locations. Single-specialty clinics had higher scores on 4 dimensions and multispecialty clinics had higher scores on 2 dimensions. Conclusion: Our data confirm the contention that the culture of medical group practices varies considerably; to a degree, this variance is as predicted by organizational theory. The culture changes as group practices become larger and more complex through diversification into multispecialty practices or become part of larger health care systems. (J Am Board Fam Pract 2003;16:394 -8.)

BACKGROUND: While primary care work conditions are associated with adverse clinician outcomes, little is known about the effect of work condition interventions on quality or safety. DESIGN: A cluster randomized controlled trial of 34 clinics in the upper Midwest and New York City. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care clinicians and their diabetic and hypertensive patients. INTERVENTIONS: Quality improvement projects to improve communication between providers, workflow design, and chronic disease management. Intervention clinics received brief summaries of their clinician and patient outcome data at baseline. MAIN MEASURES: We measured work conditions and clinician and patient outcomes both at baseline and 6-12 months post-intervention. Multilevel regression analyses assessed the impact of work condition changes on outcomes. Subgroup analyses assessed impact by intervention category. KEY RESULTS: There were no significant differences in error reduction (19 % vs. 11 %, OR of improvement 1.84, 95 % CI 0.70, 4.82, p = 0.21) or quality of care improvement (19 % improved vs. 44 %, OR 0.62, 95 % CI 0.58, 1.21, p = 0.42) between intervention and control clinics. The conceptual model linking work conditions, provider outcomes, and error reduction showed significant relationships between work conditions and provider outcomes (p ≤ 0.001) and a trend toward a reduced error rate in providers with lower burnout (OR 1.44, 95 % CI 0.94, 2.23, p = 0.09). LIMITATIONS: Few quality metrics, short time span, fewer clinicians recruited than anticipated. CONCLUSIONS: Work-life interventions improving clinician satisfaction and well-being do not necessarily reduce errors or improve quality. Longer, more focused interventions may be needed to produce meaningful improvements in patient care. Clinical trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT02542995.KEY WORDS: burnout; work-life; physician stress; physician burnout; work-life interventions.