The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Digital Mindfulness Training for Burnout Reduction in Physicians: Clinician-Driven Approach (Preprint)
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.2196/63197 · Paper page
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physician burnout is widespread in health care systems, with harmful consequences on physicians, patients, and health care organizations. Mindfulness training (MT) has proven effective in reducing burnout; however, its time-consuming requirements often pose challenges for physicians who are already struggling with their busy schedules. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to design a short and pragmatic digital MT program with input from clinicians specifically to address burnout and to test its efficacy in physicians. METHODS: Two separate nonrandomized pilot studies were conducted. In the first study, 27 physicians received the digital MT in a podcast format, while in the second study, 29 physicians and nurse practitioners accessed the same training through a free app-based platform. The main outcome measure was cynicism, one dimension of burnout. The secondary outcome measures were emotional exhaustion (the second dimension of burnout), anxiety, depression, intolerance of uncertainty, empathy (personal distress, perspective taking, and empathic concern subscales), self-compassion, and mindfulness (nonreactivity and nonjudgment subscales). In the second study, worry, sleep disturbances, and difficulties in emotion regulation were also measured. Changes in outcomes were assessed using self-report questionnaires administered before and after the treatment and 1 month later as follow-up. RESULTS: Both studies showed that MT decreased cynicism (posttreatment: 33% reduction; P≤.04; r≥0.41 and follow-up: 33% reduction; P≤.04; r≥0.45), while improvements in emotional exhaustion were observed solely in the first study (25% reduction, P=.02, r=.50 at posttreatment; 25% reduction, P=.008, r=.62 at follow-up). There were also significant reductions in anxiety (P≤.01, r≥0.49 at posttreatment; P≤.01, r≥0.54 at follow-up), intolerance of uncertainty (P≤.03, r≥.57 at posttreatment; P<.001, r≥0.66 at follow-up), and personal distress (P=.03, r=0.43 at posttreatment; P=.03, r=0.46 at follow-up), while increases in self-compassion (P≤.02, r≥0.50 at posttreatment; P≤.006, r≥0.59 at follow-up) and mindfulness (nonreactivity: P≤.001, r≥0.69 at posttreatment; P≤.004, r≥0.58 at follow-up; nonjudgment: P≤.009, r≥0.50 at posttreatment; P≤.03, r≥0.60 at follow-up). In addition, the second study reported significant decreases in worry (P=.04, r=0.40 at posttreatment; P=.006, r=0.58 at follow-up), sleep disturbances (P=.04, r=0.42 at posttreatment; P=.01, r=0.53 at follow-up), and difficulties in emotion regulation (P=.005, r=0.54 at posttreatment; P<.001, r=0.70 at follow-up). However, no changes were observed over time for depression or perspective taking and empathic concern. Finally, both studies revealed significant positive correlations between burnout and anxiety (cynicism: r≥0.38; P≤.04; emotional exhaustion: r≥0.58; P≤.001). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this research is the first where clinicians were involved in designing an intervention targeting burnout. These findings suggest that this digital MT serves as a viable and effective tool for alleviating burnout and anxiety among physicians. CLINICALTRIAL: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06145425; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06145425
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 109 · Cited by 3
Research works printed but not linked: 99
- 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3199 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1200/jco.2013.51.8480 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.08.023 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.mayocp.2022.09.002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/0142159X.2016.1248918 · DOI
- 10.2196/15608 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/s0022-3999(99)00007-0 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.10.014 · DOI
- 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.23256 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1133484 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/archsurg.2010.292 · DOI
- 10.1176/appi.ajp.161.12.2295 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.08.007 · DOI
- 10.7326/M18-1422 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015141 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-016-3886-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.mayocp.2013.07.016 · DOI
- 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0566 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/10872981.2016.1270009 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-021-06776-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.030 · DOI
- 10.1186/1472-6920-13-2 · DOI
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199738571.003.0253 · DOI
- 10.1037//0022-006x.60.3.441 · DOI
- 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182628fbf · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182086fe1 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pec.2015.11.016 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s11606-005-0102-8 · DOI
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262012973.003.0016 · DOI
- 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.1.42 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ncomms10904 · DOI
- 10.1093/scan/nst060 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31279-x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/14651858.CD002892.pub5 · DOI
- 10.1007/s12671-017-0718-x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/scs.12905 · DOI
- 10.2190/PM.43.2.b · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.medin.2018.02.005 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2009.1384 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/s1138741600002547 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.12688/f1000research.73729.2 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.explore.2018.03.008 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s12671-020-01342-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/15298860309032 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/13576500444000317 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0269216316663499 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.02.015 · DOI
- 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002546 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0157499 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/2156587214568894 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3390/medsci7020029 · DOI
- 10.1037/1072-5245.12.2.164 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/2165079918771991 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0061526 · DOI
- 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00243 · DOI
- 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318221e615 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.05.027 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10865-017-9884-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2196/26987 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-3-642-13437-1_17 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-009-1129-z · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s11606-012-2015-7 · DOI
- 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/cpp.702 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1073191107313003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p079 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10608-005-1650-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.smrv.2020.101282 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10862-009-9161-1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/15402002.2012.636266 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/sleep/33.6.781 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10862-008-9102-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003418 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jama.2009.1384 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1805101 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.01044.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.304 · DOI
- 10.1123/jsep.35.5.514 · DOI
- 10.2147/prbm.s384247 · DOI
- 10.1007/s12671-012-0158-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.12.019 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-007-0159-7 · DOI
- 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829a3b2b · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/01421590220120713 · DOI
- 10.1007/s40596-014-0100-4 · DOI
- 10.1056/nejmp1606402 · DOI
- 10.1177/0272989X9801800310 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.lab.2004.05.013 · DOI
- 10.1080/08964280109595771 · DOI
- 10.1037//0022-3514.66.4.776 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.010 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.expneurol.2014.01.023 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/mlr.0000000000001584 · DOI
- 10.7812/TPP/23.023 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Antico, L., & Brewer, J.
- Affiliations
- Brown University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Antico, Lia
- Venue
- JMIR Formative Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2024-06-12
- Volume
- 9
- Pages
- e63197-e63197
- ISSN
- 2561-326X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11806274
- OpenAlex
- W4403142021
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 109
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 1.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (202924)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
- Keywords
- physician burnout, mindfulness training, digital interventions, podcasts, mobile application, cynicism, emotional exhaustion, self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, depression, intolerance of uncertainty, emotion regulation, sleep disorders, nurse practitioners, physician well-being, burnout prevention, self-determination theory, self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control, perceived autonomy
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Burnout, Professional, Empathy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physicians, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Mindfulness
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