MP23-01 ADDRESSING BURNOUT IN UROLOGY: A QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF INTERVENTIONS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyHealth Services Research: Practice Patterns, Quality of Life and Shared Decision Making III (MP23)1 Sep 2021MP23-01 ADDRESSING BURNOUT IN UROLOGY: A QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF INTERVENTIONS Poone Shoureshi, Casey Seideman, Megan Guerre, David Callejas, Christopher Amling, and Jyoti Chouhan Poone ShoureshiPoone Shoureshi More articles by this author , Casey SeidemanCasey Seideman More articles by this author , Megan GuerreMegan Guerre More articles by this author , David CallejasDavid Callejas More articles by this author , Christopher AmlingChristopher Amling More articles by this author , and Jyoti ChouhanJyoti Chouhan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002014.01AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Physician burnout is a well-recognized issue across specialties. Our understanding of burnout interventions and workplace sponsorship in urology is inadequate. The objective of our study was to evaluate the prevalence and effectiveness of specific burnout interventions. METHODS: A 29 question workforce survey was distributed electronically to members of the Western Section American Urological Association in 2020. A portion of the questions focused on assessing the level of burnout, prevalence of work sponsored interventions and effectiveness of specific interventions. RESULTS: 440 responses were received for a 25.9% response rate. 352 were male (82.2%). 79.5% of urologists noted some degree of burnout (n=349/439). The most commonly tried interventions to reduce or prevent burnout were participating in regular physical exercise (n=337), reading non-medical literature (n=295), and decreasing/modifying work hours (n=233). The most effective interventions are noted in Figure 1. When assessed by gender, there was variation noted (Figure 2). Interventions most frequently cited as not effective are noted in Figure 3. 42.5% noted burnout interventions were workplace sponsored. CONCLUSIONS: The most effective burnout interventions varied from practice altering to personal/collegial. In addition, there was a difference in effectiveness of interventions by gender. This speaks against the “one size fits all” mentality. Unfortunately, less than half of responders noted workplace sponsorship of interventions. With higher tier support, more urologists may participate in these interventions. Source of Funding: None © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e400-e400 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Poone Shoureshi More articles by this author Casey Seideman More articles by this author Megan Guerre More articles by this author David Callejas More articles by this author Christopher Amling More articles by this author Jyoti Chouhan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...