Background The COVID-19 pandemic brought rapid changes to the work and personal lives of clinicians. Objective To assess clinician burnout and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and guide healthcare system improvement efforts. Design A survey asking about clinician burnout, well-being, and work experiences. Participants Surveys distributed to 8141 clinicians from June to August 2020 in 9 medical groups and 17 hospitals at Sutter Health, a large healthcare system in Northern California. Main Measures Burnout was the primary outcome, and other indicators of well-being and work experience were also measured. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. All statistical inferences were based on weighted estimates adjusting for response bias. Key Results A total of 3176 clinicians (39.0%) responded to the survey. Weighted results showed 29.2% reported burnout, and burnout was more common among women than among men (39.0% vs. 22.7%, p<0.01). In multivariate models, being a woman was associated with increased odds of reporting burnout (OR=2.19, 95% CI: 1.51–3.17) and being 55+ years old with lower odds (OR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.34–0.87). More women than men reported that childcare/caregiving was impacting work (32.9% vs. 19.0%, p<0.01). Even after controlling for age and gender, clinicians who reported childcare/caregiving responsibilities impacted their work had substantially higher odds of reporting burnout (OR=2.19, 95% CI: 1.54–3.11). Other factors associated with higher burnout included worrying about safety at work, being given additional work tasks, concern about losing one’s job, and working in emergency medicine or radiology. Protective factors included believing one’s concerns will be acted upon and feeling highly valued. Conclusions This large survey found the pandemic disproportionally impacted women, younger clinicians, and those whose caregiving responsibilities impacted their work. These results highlight the need for a holistic and targeted strategy for improving clinician well-being that addresses the needs of women, younger clinicians, and those with caregiving responsibilities.

We examine racial and ethnic differences in opioid prescribing and dosing for long bone fractures at emergency department (ED) discharge. Methods:We conducted an electronic health records-based cross-sectional study of adults with long bone fractures who presented to the ED across 22 sites from a health care delivery system (2016 to 2017). We examined differences in opioid prescribing at ED discharge and, among patients with a prescription, differences in opioid dosing (measured as morphine milligram equivalents) by race/ethnicity, using regression modeling with statistical adjustment for patient, fracture, and prescriber characteristics.Results: A total of 11,576 patients with long bone fractures were included in the study; 64.4% were non-Hispanic white; 16.4%, 7.3%, 5.8%, and 5.1%, respectively, were Hispanic, Asian, black, and of other or unknown race; and 65.6% received an opioid at discharge. After adjusting for other factors, rates of opioid prescribing were not different by race/ethnicity; however, among patients with an opioid prescription, total morphine milligram equivalent units prescribed were 4.3%, 6.0%, and 8.1% less for Hispanics, blacks, and Asians relative to non-Hispanic whites. Conclusion:Racial and ethnic minority groups with long bone fractures receive similar frequencies of opioid prescriptions at discharge, with a small potency difference. How this affects pain relief and why it happens is unclear. [Ann Emerg Med.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Group-based lifestyle change programs based on the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) are associated with clinically significant weight loss and decreases in cardiometabolic risk factors. However, these benefits depend on successful real-world implementation. Studies have examined implementation in community settings, but less is known about integration in healthcare systems, and particularly in large, multi-site systems with the potential for extended reach. OBJECTIVE: To examine the barriers and facilitators to successful DPP implementation in a large multi-site healthcare system. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews, based on the RE-AIM framework, were conducted in person for 30-90 min each. PARTICIPANTS: Past and present DPP lifestyle coaches in the healthcare system identified using purposive sampling. APPROACH: Thematic analysis of qualitative data to identify key factors influencing the success of DPP implementation. An iterative consensus process was used to model the relationships among factors. KEY RESULTS: We conducted 33 interviews across 20 clinic sites serving 12 counties. Participants described six key factors as potential barriers or facilitators to implementation, including (1) Broader Context, including the surrounding physical and sociodemographic context; (2) Institutional Context, including finances, infrastructure, and personnel; (3) Program Provision, including curriculum, administration, cost, goals, and visibility; (4) Recruitment Process, including screening and referrals; (5) Lifestyle Coaches, including their characteristics, behaviors, and morale; and (6) Cohort, including group attrition/retention and interpersonal dynamics. These factors were both highly interconnected in their impact on implementation and widely variable across sites within the healthcare system, as illustrated in our multi-level conceptual framework. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified key factors that could serve as barriers or facilitators in the implementation of DPP in large healthcare systems, from the perspective of lifestyle coaches. With further examination, the conceptual model presented here may be used for planning and managing the implementation of group-based behavioral interventions in these settings.