These are challenging times for health care executives. The health care field is experiencing unprecedented changes that threaten the survival of many health care organizations. To successfully ...navigate these challenges, health care executives need committed and productive physicians working in collaboration with organization leaders. Unfortunately, national studies suggest that at least 50% of US physicians are experiencing professional burnout, indicating that most executives face this challenge with a disillusioned physician workforce. Burnout is a syndrome characterized by exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced effectiveness. Physician burnout has been shown to influence quality of care, patient safety, physician turnover, and patient satisfaction. Although burnout is a system issue, most institutions operate under the erroneous framework that burnout and professional satisfaction are solely the responsibility of the individual physician. Engagement is the positive antithesis of burnout and is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption in work. There is a strong business case for organizations to invest in efforts to reduce physician burnout and promote engagement. Herein, we summarize 9 organizational strategies to promote physician engagement and describe how we have operationalized some of these approaches at Mayo Clinic. Our experience demonstrates that deliberate, sustained, and comprehensive efforts by the organization to reduce burnout and promote engagement can make a difference. Many effective interventions are relatively inexpensive, and small investments can have a large impact. Leadership and sustained attention from the highest level of the organization are the keys to making progress.
To assess adherence to and individual or systematic deviations from predicted physician compensation by gender or race/ethnicity at a large academic medical center that uses a salary-only structured ...compensation model incorporating national benchmarks and clear standardized pay steps and increments.
All permanent staff physicians employed at Mayo Clinic medical practices in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida who served in clinical roles as of January 2017. Each physician's pay, demographics, specialty, full-time equivalent status, benchmark pay for the specialty, leadership role(s), and other factors that may influence compensation within the plan were collected and analyzed. For each individual, the natural log of pay was used to determine predicted pay and 95% CI based on the structured compensation plan, compared with their actual salary.
Among 2845 physicians (861 women, 722 nonwhites), pay equity was affirmed in 96% (n=2730). Of the 80 physicians (2.8%) with higher and 35 (1.2%) with lower than predicted pay, there was no interaction with gender or race/ethnicity. More men (31.4%; 623 of 1984) than women (15.9%; 137 of 861) held or had held a compensable leadership position. More men (34.7%; 688 of 1984) than women (20.5%; 177 of 861) were represented in the most highly compensated specialties.
A structured compensation model was successfully applied to all physicians at a multisite large academic medical system and resulted in pay equity. However, achieving overall gender pay equality will only be fully realized when women achieve parity in the ranks of the most highly compensated specialties and in leadership roles.
Background:
It is unclear if all patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) ultimately develop progressive MS. Onset of progressive disease course seems to be age- rather than ...disease duration-dependent. Some forms of progressive MS (e.g. primary progressive MS (PPMS)) are uncommon in population-based studies. Ascertainment of patients with PPMS from clinic-based populations can facilitate a powerful comparison of age at progression onset between secondary progressive MS (SPMS) and PPMS but may introduce unclear biases.
Objective:
Our aim is to confirm that onset of progressive disease course is more relevant to the patient’s age than the presence or duration of a pre-progression relapsing disease course in MS.
Methods:
We studied a population-based MS cohort (n=210, RRMS n=109, progressive MS n=101) and a clinic-based progressive MS cohort (n=754). Progressive course was classified as primary (PPMS; n=322), single attack (SAPMS; n=112) and secondary progressive (SPMS; n=421). We studied demographics (chi2 or t-test), age-of-progression-onset (t-test) and time to Expanded Disability Status Scale of 6 (EDSS6) (Kaplan–Meier analyses).
Results:
Sex ratio (p=0.58), age at progression onset (p=0.37) and time to EDSS6 (p=0.16) did not differ between the cohorts. Progression had developed before age 75 in 99% of patients with known progressive disease course; 38% with RRMS did not develop progression by age 75. Age at progression onset did not differ between SPMS (44.9±9.6), SAPMS (45.5±9.6) and PPMS (45.7±10.8). In either cohort, only 2% of patients had reached EDSS6 before onset of progression.
Conclusions:
Patients with RRMS do not inevitably develop a progressive disease course. Onset of progression is more dependent on age than the presence or duration of a pre-progression symptomatic disease course. Moderate disability is sustained predominantly after the onset of a progressive disease course in MS.
The cause of multiple sclerosis remains unknown after more than a century of study. Unconfirmed work has once more indicated that a viral infection may be important in the aetiology of the disease, ...and there is considerable evidence for an important genetic influence on disease susceptibility. The clinical course is as variable as that of any disease in medicine. Studies using serial magnetic resonance imaging have helped to define the disease course and response to experimental therapies. Although the predominant pathological characteristic is myelin loss with preservation of axons, some studies recall classic descriptions that irreversible axonal destruction may occur, perhaps even in the early stages of the illness. There are now several, partially effective therapies for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis and here I review progress in determining the timing and course of the illness and the steps that need to be taken to identify more effective treatments for this disease.
There are no established treatments for patients with acute, severe neurological deficits caused by multiple sclerosis or other inflammatory demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system who ...fail to recover after treatment with high‐dose corticosteroids. We conducted a randomized, sham‐controlled, double‐masked study of plasma exchange without concomitant immunosuppressive treatment in patients with recently acquired, severe neurological deficits resulting from attacks of inflammatory demyelinating disease, who failed to recover after treatment with intravenous corticosteroids. Patients who did not achieve moderate or greater improvement after the first treatment phase crossed over to the opposite treatment. Moderate or greater improvement in neurological disability occurred during 8 of 19 (42.1%) courses of active treatment compared with 1 of 17 (5.9%) courses of sham treatment. The primary analysis was positive. Improvement occurred early in the course of treatment, and was sustained on follow‐up. However, 4 of the patients who responded to the active treatment experienced new attacks of demyelinating disease during 6 months of follow‐up. Moderate or greater improvement occurred during follow‐up in only 2 of 13 patients who failed to improve during the treatment phase. Plasma exchange leads to functionally important neurological recovery in an important proportion of severely disabled patients with acute attacks of idiopathic inflammatory demyelinating disease.
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the relationship between early relapse recovery and onset of progressive multiple sclerosis (MS).
METHODS:We studied a population-based cohort (105 patients with ...relapsing-remitting MS, 86 with bout-onset progressive MS) and a clinic-based cohort (415 patients with bout-onset progressive MS), excluding patients with primary progressive MS. Bout-onset progressive MS includes patients with single-attack progressive and secondary progressive MS. “Good recovery” (as opposed to “poor recovery”) was assigned if the peak deficit of the relapse improved completely or almost completely (patient-reported and examination-confirmed outcome measured ≥6 months post relapse). Impact of initial relapse recovery and first 5-year average relapse recovery on cumulative incidence of progressive MS was studied accounting for patients yet to develop progressive MS in the population-based cohort (Kaplan-Meier analyses). Impact of initial relapse recovery on time to progressive MS onset was also studied in the clinic-based cohort with already-established progressive MS (t test).
RESULTS:In the population-based cohort, 153 patients (80.1%) had on average good recovery from first 5-year relapses, whereas 30 patients (15.7%) had on average poor recovery. Half of the good recoverers developed progressive MS by 30.2 years after MS onset, whereas half of the poor recoverers developed progressive MS by 8.3 years after MS onset (p = 0.001). In the clinic-based cohort, good recovery from the first relapse alone was also associated with a delay in progressive disease onset (p < 0.001). A brainstem, cerebellar, or spinal cord syndrome (p = 0.001) or a fulminant relapse (p < 0.0001) was associated with a poor recovery from the initial relapse.
CONCLUSIONS:Patients with MS with poor recovery from early relapses will develop progressive disease course earlier than those with good recovery.
PDF
