Background: While COVID-19 has had far-reaching consequences on society and health care providers, there is a paucity of research exploring frontline emergency medicine (EM) provider wellness over the course of a pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the well-being, resilience, burnout, and wellness factors and needs of EM physicians and advanced practice providers (e.g., nurse practitioners and physician assistants; APPs) during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A descriptive, prospective, cohort survey study of EM physicians and APPs was performed across ten emergency departments in a single state, including academic and community settings. Participants were recruited via email to complete four weekly, voluntary, anonymous questionnaires comprised of customized and validated tools for assessing wellness (Well Being Index), burnout (Physician Work Life Study item), and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale) during the initial acceleration phase of COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate analysis with Chi-squared, Fisher’s Exact, and logistic regression was performed. Results: Of 213 eligible participants, response rates ranged from 31 to 53% over four weeks. Women comprised 54 to 60% of responses. Nonrespondent characteristics were similar to respondents. Concern for personal safety decreased from 85 to 61% (p < 0.001). Impact on basic self-care declined from 66 to 32% (p < 0.001). Symptoms of stress, anxiety, or fear was initially 83% and reduced to 66% (p = 0.009). Reported strain on relationships and feelings of isolation affected > 50% of respondents initially without significant change (p = 0.05 and p = 0.30 respectively). Women were nearly twice as likely to report feelings of isolation as men (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.82–5.88). Working part-time carried twice the risk of burnout (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.10–5.47). Baseline resilience was normal to high. Provider well-being improved over the four weeks (30 to 14%; p = 0.01), but burnout did not significantly change (30 to 22%; p = 0.39). Conclusion: This survey of frontline EM providers, including physicians and APPs, during the initial surge of COVID-19 found that despite being a resilient group, the majority experienced stress, anxiety, fear, and concerns about personal safety due to COVID-19, putting many at risk for burnout. The sustained impact of the pandemic on EM provider wellness deserves further investigation to guide targeted interventions.

Introduction: Being named as a defendant in a malpractice lawsuit is known to be a particularly high-stress and vulnerable time for a physician. Medical malpractice stress syndrome (MMSS) is a consequence of being named as a physician defendant in a malpractice lawsuit. Symptoms include depression, anxiety, and insomnia, which may lead to burnout, loss of confidence in clinical decision-making, substance abuse, strain on personal and professional relationships, and suicidal ideation. Although the legal process requires strict confidentiality regarding the specific details of the legal case, discussing the emotional impact of the case is not prohibited. Given that physicians often do not choose formalized therapy with a licensed professional, there is a recognized need to provide physicians with options to support their wellness during a lawsuit.Methods: The peer support model is a promising option to address the negative impacts to wellness that physician defendants face during medical malpractice lawsuits. We developed and implemented a peer support program to provide a safe, protected space for discussion of the personal impact of a lawsuit and to normalize this experience among peer physicians.Results: Physicians were receptive to joining a peer support group to discuss the personal impacts of being named in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Participants in this novel group-based program found it helpful and would unanimously recommend it to others who are being sued.Conclusion: To our knowledge, this pilot study is the first to implement and assess a facilitated, group-based peer support model for emergency physicians who are named as defendants in malpractice lawsuits. While group discussions demonstrated that symptoms of acute distress and MMSS were prevalent among physicians who were being sued, in this study physicians were receptive to and felt better after peer support sessions. Despite increasing burnout in the specialty of emergency medicine (EM) during the study time frame, burnout did not worsen in participants. Extrapolating from this pilot program, we hypothesize that formal peer support offered by EM groups can be an effective option to normalize the experience of being sued, promote wellness, and benefit physicians who endure the often long and stressful process of a medical malpractice lawsuit.

Background: While the coronavirus (COVID-19) has had far-reaching consequences on society and health care providers, there is a paucity of research exploring emergency medicine (EM) provider wellness over the course of a pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the well-being, resilience, burnout, and wellness factors and needs of EM physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: A longitudinal, descriptive, prospective cohort survey study of 213 EM physicians and APPs was performed across ten emergency departments in a single state, including academic and community settings. Participants were recruited via email to complete four weekly, voluntary, anonymous questionnaires comprised of customized and validated tools for assessing wellness (Well Being Index), burnout (Physician Work Life Study item), and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale) during the initial acceleration phase of COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate analysis with Chi-squared, Fisher’s Exact, and logistic regression was performed.Results: Of 213 eligible participants, response rates ranged from 31 to 53% over four weeks. Women comprised 54 to 60% of responses. Nonrespondent characteristics were similar to respondents. Concern for personal safety decreased from 85% to 61% (p<0.001). Impact on basic self-care declined from 66% to 32% (p50% of respondents initially without significant change (p=0.05 and p=0.30 respectively). Women were nearly twice as likely to report feelings of isolation as men (OR 1.95; 95%CI 1.82-5.88). Working part-time carried twice the risk of burnout (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.10-5.47). Baseline resilience was normal to high. Provider well-being improved over the four-weeks (30% to 14%; p=0.01), but burnout did not significantly change (30% to 22%; p=0.39).Conclusion: This survey of frontline EM providers during the initial surge of COVID-19 found that despite being a resilient group, the majority experienced stress, anxiety, fear, and concerns about personal safety due to COVID-19, with many at risk for burnout. The sustained impact of the pandemic on EM provider wellness deserves further investigation to guide targeted interventions.

In emergency medicine (EM), the interplay of wellbeing and burnout impacts not only patient care, but the health, productivity, and job satisfaction of EM healthcare workers. The study objective was to use a rapid assessment tool to identify factors that impact EM worker satisfaction, or “wellness,” while on shift in the emergency department (ED) and the association with role and level of satisfaction. This prospective descriptive study utilized a QR‐code‐based electronic survey instrument that included a 7‐point Likert shift satisfaction score. A voluntary response sampling was obtained from EM workers at five EDs. Respondents self‐reported role and work site. Association and logistic regression analysis were performed. Of 755 responses, 467 were dissatisfied (score ≤ 5) and 288 were satisfied (score ≥ 6) with their shifts. Physicians reported higher satisfaction on shift than nurses (OR 2.77, 95% CL 2.01–3.81, p < 0.01). Factors associated with dissatisfied responses included: admission or transfer process (OR 0.40, CL 0.21–0.77, p < 0.01), boarding patients (OR 0.13, CL 0.06–0.27, p < 0.01), tools to do my job (OR 0.65, CL 0.46–0.90, p = 0.01), and patient flow (OR 0.72, CL 0.53–0.98, p = 0.04). Factors linked to a satisfied response included: teaching/learning (OR 2.85, CL 1.86–4.37, p < 0.01) and team/coworker interaction (OR 8.92, CL 6.14–12.96, p < 0.01). Satisfaction on shift for EM physicians, nurses, and staff differ and are associated with multiple identifiable factors. Focused attention to work environment and operations could help mitigate on‐shift dissatisfaction. Endeavors aimed at cultivating and enhancing a supportive teaching and learning environment with an emphasis on team member and coworker interaction could positively impact and improve wellness.

Although clinical ultrasound (CUS) is a core skill that is a requirement for emergency medicine (EM) residency graduation, only a fraction of EM practitioners who trained prior to this requirement are certified in CUS. The objective of the study was to implement a CUS workshop for practicing EM physicians, identify barriers to utilization, and assess comfort with the machine, obtaining and interpreting images, and incorporating CUS into clinical practice. This was a prospective descriptive cohort study of EM physician faculty who participated in an interactive 5-hour CUS workshop intervention that introduced four core CUS modalities via didactics and hands-on scanning stations. Pre- and post-surveys were administered to identify barriers to utilization and assess perceived comfort with CUS using a 5-point Likert scale. Results were analyzed using Fisher’s exact and paired t-tests. Thirty-five EM physicians participated with a 100% survey response rate. Only five of the physicians were ultrasound certified at the time of the workshop. On average, physicians were 16 years post-residency. Prior to the workshop, 29% had minimal ultrasound experience and 43% had not performed more than 50 ultrasounds. In the pre-course survey, every physician expressed at least one barrier to CUS utilization. Post-workshop, physicians felt significantly more comfortable using the ultrasound machine (p=0.0008), obtaining and interpreting images (p=0.0009 and p=0.0004), and incorporating CUS into clinical practice (p=0.002). This workshop is an effective tool to expose practicing physicians to core concepts of CUS, improve their comfort level, and reduce barriers to ultrasound utilization.

Background: Flexible work-life policies for medical school faculty are necessary to support career progress, advancement, retention, and job satisfaction. Objective: Our objective was to perform a 10-year follow-up descriptive assessment of the availability of flexible work-life policies for faculty in medical schools in the Big Ten Conference. Design: In this descriptive study, a modified objective scoring system was used to evaluate the flexibility of faculty work-life policies at 13 medical schools in the Big Ten Conference. Policy information was obtained from institutional websites and verified with the human resources offices. Scores from the 2011 study and 2020 were compared. Results: Michigan State and Ohio State Universities offered the most flexible policies (score 17.75/22) with the Universities of Maryland and Minnesota following (score 16/22). The largest delta scores, indicating more flexible policies in the past decade, were at University of Minnesota (5.25) and University of Michigan (5). Policies for parental leave and part-time faculty varied widely. Most schools earned an additional point in the newly added category of “flexible scheduling and return-to-work policies.” Nearly every institution reported dedicated lactation spaces and improved childcare options. Limitations: Limitations included missing policy data and interpretation bias in reviewing the policy websites, unavailable baseline data for schools that joined the Big Ten after the 2011 study, and unavailable baseline data for the additional category of return-to-work policies. Conclusions: While progress has been made, every institution should challenge themselves to review flexibility in work-life policies for faculty. It is important to advance a healthy competition with the goal to achieve more forward-thinking policies that improve retention, recruitment, and advancement of faculty. Big Ten institutions can continue to advance their policies by providing greater ease of access to options, further expansion of parental leave and childcare support, and offering more flexible policies for part-time faculty.