Physicians' Needs in Coping With Emotional Stressors The Case for Peer Support

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill.: 1960) (Impact Factor: 4.93). 11/2011; 147(3):212-7. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2011.312
Source: PubMed


To design an evidence-based intervention to address physician distress, based on the attitudes toward support among physicians at our hospital.
A 56-item survey was administered to a convenience sample (n = 108) of resident and attending physicians at surgery, emergency medicine, and anesthesiology departmental conferences at a large tertiary care academic hospital.
Likelihood of seeking support, perceived barriers, awareness of available services, sources of support, and experience with stress.
Among the resident and attending physicians, 79% experienced either a serious adverse patient event and/or a traumatic personal event within the preceding year. Willingness to seek support was reported for legal situations (72%), involvement in medical errors (67%), adverse patient events (63%), substance abuse (67%), physical illness (62%), mental illness (50%), and interpersonal conflict at work (50%). Barriers included lack of time (89%), uncertainty or difficulty with access (69%), concerns about lack of confidentiality (68%), negative impact on career (68%), and stigma (62%). Physician colleagues were the most popular potential sources of support (88%), outnumbering traditional mechanisms such as the employee assistance program (29%) and mental health professionals (48%). Based on these results, a one-on-one peer physician support program was incorporated into support services at our hospital.
Despite the prevalence of stressful experiences and the desire for support among physicians, established services are underused. As colleagues are the most acceptable sources of support, we advocate peer support as the most effective way to address this sensitive but important issue.

Download full-text


Available from: Megan L Fix
  • Source
    • "Yet, despite the variety of stress management techniques, evidence show that physicians rarely make use of the support available[44,45]. This is not only due to the stigma associated with revealing emotions but also to a lack of time in clinical practice[46,47]. Long working hours and heavy work load are not conducive to mental wellbeing[36]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The academic and medical literature highlights the positive effects of empathy for patient care. Yet, very little attention has been given to the impact of the requirement for empathy on the physicians themselves and on their emotional wellbeing. The medical profession requires doctors to be both clinically competent and empathetic towards the patients. In practice, accommodating both requirements can be difficult for physicians. The image of the technically skilful, rational, and emotionally detached doctor dominates the profession, and inhibits physicians from engaging emotionally with their patients and their own feelings, which forms the basis for empathy. This inhibition has a negative impact not only on the patients but also on the physicians. The expression of emotions in medical practice is perceived as unprofessional and many doctors learn to supress and ignore their feelings. When facing stressful situations, these physicians are more likely to suffer from depression and burnout than those who engage with and reflect on their feelings. Physicians should be supported in their emotional work, which will help them develop empathy. Methods could include questionnaires that aid self-reflection, and discussion groups with peers and supervisors on emotional experiences. Yet, in order for these methods to work, the negative image associated with the expression of emotions should be questioned. Also, the work conditions of physicians should improve to allow them to make use of these tools. Empathy should not only be expected from doctors but should be actively promoted, assisted and cultivated in the medical profession.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2016 · BMC Medical Ethics
  • Source
    • "Adverse events (AE) are the cause of harm and suffering in patients and may also markedly affect the work, family and personal life of health professionals involved[1], second victims, as well as damaging the reputation of affected health organisations (third victims), by undermining people's trust in these institutions[2,3]. Between 28 and 57 % of physicians4567(79–89 % in the case of residents[8,9]) recognise having being involved in medical error with serious consequences for one or more patients at some point in their career, while 90 %[6]believe that in their hospital there is insufficient help and support for professionals following an AE. In Spain, extrapolating from national AE data in hospitals[10]and primary care[11], it has been estimated[2][16]identified different strategies for managers of healthcare organisations to deal with the issue of second victims. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Adverse events (AE) are also the cause of suffering in health professionals involved. This study was designed to identify and analyse organization-level strategies adopted in both primary care and hospitals in Spain to address the impact of serious AE on second and third victims. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in healthcare organizations assessing: safety culture; health organization crisis management plans for serious AE; actions planned to ensure transparency in communication with patients (and relatives) who experience an AE; support for second victims; and protective measures to safeguard the institution's reputation (the third victim). Results: A total of 406 managers and patient safety coordinators replied to the survey. Deficient provision of support for second victims was acknowledged by 71 and 61 % of the participants from hospitals and primary care respectively; these respondents reported there was no support protocol for second victims in place in their organizations. Regarding third victim initiatives, 35 % of hospital and 43 % of primary care professionals indicated no crisis management plan for serious AE existed in their organization, and in the case of primary care, there was no crisis committee in 34 % of cases. The degree of implementation of second and third victim support interventions was perceived to be greater in hospitals (mean 14.1, SD 3.5) than in primary care (mean 11.8, SD 3.1) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Many Spanish health organizations do not have a second and third victim support or a crisis management plan in place to respond to serious AEs.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2015 · BMC Health Services Research
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In July 2011, the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society sponsored a think tank of experts in the field of medical professionalism to focus on interventions and remediation strategies for those-medical students, residents, faculty, and practicing physicians-who demonstrate lapses in professional performance, particularly if the lapses are repeated. Several participants have produced scholarly work on the assessment of professionalism. However, assessment has a limited purpose unless it leads to improvements at both the organizational and individual levels. The field of professionalism has matured enough to recognize that one of the contemporary issues within the self-regulation framework is the task of remediation. Yet there is a paucity of evidence to inform best practices to help those who have lapses. Ultimately, the most effective response to an individual's lapse in professionalism may not be simply to gather knowledge about remedial practices but also to understand organizational responses to the information about such practices already possessed by the institution.The authors report the think tank participants' recommendations on (1) how to use existing data on professionalism remediation and (2) what new evidence is needed to advance approaches to remediation of professional performance. Participants also recommended that the education community can focus on interventions and remediation by (1) performing studies about improving medical professionalism when lapses occur, (2) identifying best evidence-based remediation practices, (3) widely disseminating those practices, and (4) moving over time from a best-practices approach to remediation (which does not yet exist) to a best-evidence model.
    No preview · Article · Oct 2012 · Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
Show more