Cited by 376Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutOccupational Health and BurnoutStress and Burnout Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Cluster Randomized Trial of Interventions to Improve Work Conditions and Clinician Burnout in Primary Care: Results from the Healthy Work Place (HWP) Study

Open access

Abstract

Background Work conditions in primary care are associated with physician burnout and lower quality of care.Objective We aimed to assess if improvements in work conditions improve clinician stress and burnout.Subjects Primary care clinicians at 34 clinics in the upper Midwest and New York City participated in the study.Study design This was a cluster randomized controlled trial.Measures Work conditions, such as time pressure, workplace chaos, and work control, as well as clinician outcomes, were measured at baseline and at 12-18 months. A brief worklife and work conditions summary measure was provided to staff and clinicians at intervention sites.Interventions Diverse interventions were grouped into three categories: 1) improved communication; 2) changes in workflow, and 3) targeted quality improvement (QI) projects.Analysis Multilevel regressions assessed impact of worklife data and interventions on clinician outcomes. A multilevel analysis then looked at clinicians whose outcome scores improved and determined types of interventions associated with improvement.Results Of 166 clinicians, 135 (81.3%) completed the study. While there was no group treatment effect of baseline data on clinician outcomes, more intervention clinicians showed improvements in burnout (21.8% vs 7.1% less burned out, p = 0.01) and satisfaction (23.1% vs 10.0% more satisfied, p = 0.04). Burnout was more likely to improve with workflow interventions [Odds Ratio (OR) of improvement in burnout 5.9, p = 0.02], and with targeted QI projects than in controls (OR 4.8, p = 0.02). Interventions in communication or workflow led to greater improvements in clinician satisfaction (OR 3.1, p = 0.04), and showed a trend toward greater improvement in intention to leave (OR 4.2, p = 0.06).Limitations We used heterogeneous intervention types, and were uncertain how well interventions were instituted.Conclusions Organizations may be able to improve burnout, dissatisfaction and retention by addressing communication and workflow, and initiating QI projects targeting clinician concerns.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-015-3235-4

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 24 references

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Williams ES, Halbesleben JRB, Manwell L, et al. The effect of workplace stress and burnout on patient outcomes. In: Carayon P, ed. Handbook of Human Factors in Healthcare and Patient Safety. Mahwah: Erlbaum; 2011.
  2. Pathman DE, Konrad TR, Williams ES, Scheckler WE, Linzer M, Douglas J. Physician job satisfaction, job dissatisfaction and physician turnover. J Fam Pract. 2002;51(7):e593.
  3. Babbott S, Baier L, Linzer M, et al. Electronic health records and physician stress in office based practice. JAMIA. 2013;0:1–7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 376

Metadata

Authors
Linzer, M., Poplau, S., Grossman, E., Varkey, A., Yale, S., Williams, E., Hicks, L., Brown, R. L., Wallock, J., Kohnhorst, D., & Barbouche, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Loyola University Medical Center (US)
  • Marshfield Clinic (US)
  • University of Alabama (US)
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Linzer, Mark
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published
2015-02-28
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
1105-1111
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
OpenAlex
W2057226650
Cited by
376
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 6
FWCI
42.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (5r18hs018160-03, R18HS018160)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
clinician burnout, working conditions, primary care, workflow redesign, communication intervention, quality improvement projects, provider satisfaction, turnover intention, time pressure, job control
MeSH terms
Adult, Burnout, Professional, Communication, Female, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Job Satisfaction, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Stress, Psychological, Cluster Analysis, Workplace, Workflow, Physicians, Primary Care, Quality Improvement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review