Clinician Job Satisfaction After Peer Comparison Feedback

Author:

Doctor Jason N.1,Goldstein Noah J.2,Fox Craig R.2,Linder Jeffrey A.3,Persell Stephen D.3,Stewart Emily P.1,Knight Tara K.1,Meeker Daniella14

Affiliation:

1. Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles

2. UCLA Anderson School of Management, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California

3. Division of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois

4. Department of Biomedical Informatics & Data Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

Abstract

ImportanceInterventions that improve clinician performance through feedback should not contribute to job dissatisfaction or staff turnover. Measurement of job satisfaction may help identify interventions that lead to this undesirable consequence.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether mean job satisfaction was less than the margin of clinical significance among clinicians who received social norm feedback (peer comparison) compared with clinicians who did not.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis secondary, preregistered, noninferiority analysis of a cluster randomized trial compared 3 interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design from November 1, 2011, to April 1, 2014. A total of 248 clinicians were enrolled from 47 clinics. The sample size for this analysis was determined by the number of nonmissing job satisfaction scores from the original enrolled sample, which was 201 clinicians from 43 clinics. Data analysis was performed from October 12 to April 13, 2022.InterventionsFeedback comparing individual clinician performance to top-performing peers, delivered in monthly emails (peer comparison).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a response to the following statement: “Overall, I am satisfied with my current job.” Responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).ResultsA total of 201 clinicians (response rate, 81%) from 43 of the 47 clinics (91%) provided a survey response about job satisfaction. Clinicians were primarily female (n = 129 [64%]) and board certified in internal medicine (n = 126 [63%]), with a mean (SD) age of 48 (10) years. The clinic-clustered difference in mean job satisfaction was greater than −0.32 (β = 0.11; 95% CI, −0.19 to 0.42; P = .46). Therefore, the preregistered null hypothesis that peer comparison is inferior by resulting in at least a 1-point decrease in job satisfaction by 1 in 3 clinicians was rejected. The secondary null hypothesis that job satisfaction was similar among clinicians randomized to social norm feedback was not able to be rejected. The effect size did not change when controlling for other trial interventions (t = 0.08; P = .94), and no interaction effects were observed.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, peer comparison did not lead to lower job satisfaction. Features that may have protected against dissatisfaction include clinicians’ agency over the performance measure, privacy of individual performance, and allowing all clinicians to achieve top performance.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT05575115 and NCT01454947

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3