Perspectives: How Collaborative Care Combats Physician Burnout

May 30, 2024 | by

TTA has an open invitation to industry leaders to contribute to our Perspectives non-promotional opinion and thought leadership area. Today’s contribution is from Sussan Nwogwugwu, DNP, PMHNP, Clinical Leader at Done. In this article, Dr. Nwogwugwu discusses physician burnout, how it can affect delivery of care, and how collaborative and comprehensive care can mitigate burnout.

Done is a leading provider of telehealth services for individuals with ADHD, dedicated to delivering comprehensive, patient-first care. With a network that spans more than 35 states, Done connects individuals with ADHD to experienced, board-certified providers for personalized treatment plans and medication management. 

Physician burnout is a significant concern, as it affects not only physician well-being but the quality of care they deliver.

The state of primary physician burnout
The American Medical Association found that at the end of 2021, nearly 63% of physicians had reported burnout symptoms. This was roughly a 66% increase from the preceding year, highlighting the urgent need for systemic changes to support physician mental and emotional health. Increasing burnout is attributed to excessive workload, administrative burdens and lack of support and resources.

Collaborative care and its benefits
Collaboration between a team of multidisciplinary healthcare professionals decreases clinician workload and leads to enhanced job satisfaction. Additionally, feelings of isolation and burnout among physicians are reduced. Most importantly, the continued skill building and exchange of knowledge contribute to professional growth.

For mental health patients, collaborative care ensures holistic care and access to specialized services and continuity of care, particularly for patients managing chronic conditions.

Comprehensive care supports providers
A collaborative care model is designed to reduce the burden on primary care providers; and enhance clinician well-being and patient care by integrating comprehensive behavioral health support within the primary care framework. Comprehensive care supports providers in several ways:

Impact analysis
Impact analysis, primarily powered by data analytics software, provides insights into treatment effectiveness. It is particularly helpful in guiding interventions.

Impact analysis further addresses burnout and other issues by identifying areas for improvement, ultimately guaranteeing effective resource allocation and helping track the progress of interventions over time for better adjustments.

Evidence-based interventions (EBI)
EBI enables providers to use resources efficiently by enlightening them on what works and does not. It also enhances job satisfaction and morale, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes. Finally, using evidence-based treatments reduces the chances of facing legal action if something goes wrong.

Physicians leverage technology to learn more about EBIs across various medical fields; that can include digital libraries/databases, clinical decision support systems, mobile applications, telehealth platforms and online resources.

Frequent reviews and an inclusive patient approach
Frequent reviews help identify and address areas for practice improvement due to informative feedback they provide. An inclusive patient approach reduces burnout and provides a sense of fulfillment among providers by nurturing greater patient engagement and increasing satisfaction.

Comprehensive care supports patients
In addition to benefiting health care providers, comprehensive care benefits patients, too.

Impact analysis
Impact analysis fosters an in-depth understanding of a patient’s needs and responses to treatment, leading to more personalized care. Patients can also make informed decisions about their health and treatment options, guided by physician recommendations on helpful online resources.

Evidence-based interventions
EBI supports patients, reduces the risk of adverse effects, and ascertains that patients receive appropriate, high-quality, rigorously tested and proven care. Additionally, since EBI is founded on research and clinical evidence, it guarantees better health outcomes.

Frequent reviews and an inclusive patient approach
Frequent reviews enable personalized care and continuous treatment plan adjustment per each patient’s progress and feedback. Remote patient monitoring technologies like smart watches or mobile health apps help to track key health metrics and symptoms, thereby fostering patient empowerment and ensuring adherence to treatment plans by involving them in their own care.

Why medicine is shifting toward value-based care
Medicine is gradually shifting to a value-based care model to deliver patient-centered, effective, cost-efficient healthcare. This is in response to the conventional fee-for-service model that incentivizes quantity over quality, which results in unnecessary procedures, fragmented care and unsustainable healthcare costs.

Technology, a key defining factor in value-based care, leverages EHRs, telemedicine platforms and data analytics tools to refine ADHD care and eliminate draining tasks that lead to burnout.

Telemedicine platforms enable remote consultations, making it easier for patients to access specialized services without the need for physical visits. Additionally, data analytics tools track patient outcomes and identify trends, allowing for more personalized and effective treatment plans.

Through integrating EHRs, telemedicine platforms and advanced data analytics, multidisciplinary healthcare teams can streamline communication and coordination. EHRs provide team members access to up-to-date patient information, thereby reducing errors and enhancing continuity of care.

Collaborative + comprehensive care = value-based care
Collaborative and comprehensive care, combined with technology tools, contribute to value-based care by enhancing patient experience and treatment outcomes; and optimizing resource utilization.

These care models collectively promote improved population health, foster accountability and transparency and encourage continuous improvement.

Through collaborative care models, the value of health care is maximized and aligns with value-based care goals, alleviating increasing levels of physician burnout.

EHR system-generated emails/inbasket messages contributing to burnout in 36% of doctors: study

July 3, 2019 | by

That crispy feeling is real. Unlike the overflowing paper forms, charts, and faxes of olden days (!), doctors and clinical staff now not only deal with paper, but also with what physicians call their ‘electronic masters’. The volume is astounding and has led to numerous studies of physician burnout. One of the latest has been published in Health Affairs (free access), a directional study which will not cheer up anyone concerned with doctor health and retention in the field.

A study of over 900 physicians at the Palo Alto Medical Foundation found that almost half (114, 47 percent) of the 243 weekly in-basket messages received per physician, on average, were algorithmically generated out of their Epic EHR. This far exceeded emails from colleagues (53), from themselves (31, e.g. reports), and patients (30). Other findings from the study:

  • 36 percent of the physicians reported burnout symptoms
  • 29 percent intended to reduce their clinical work time in the upcoming year
  • 45 percent with burnout symptoms received greater-than-average numbers of weekly EHR-generated in-basket messages
  • Receiving more than the average number of system-generated in-basket messages was associated with 40 percent higher probability of burnout and 38 percent higher probability of intending to reduce clinical work time
  • EHR message volume was highest for internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics

While this is only one group of physicians in one location, and limited by specialties,this excerpt from the concluding discussion tends to say nearly all:

Therefore, both perceived and realized loss of autonomy over their work schedules could leave physicians feeling defeated, even though some of these system-generated messages have been shown to improve certain processes of care for patients with chronic illnesses.

Health care organizations need to reconsider some of their approaches to improving the quality of care and population health. Physicians might not be the most appropriate recipients of some system-generated messages. Payers and government regulators may need to be part of the solution in enabling physicians to practice at the top of their license. EHR design engineers also need to reconsider whether system-generated automatic messages are the best way to ensure quality of care. It may be time to examine whether every reminder to order routine chronic disease management lab tests (for example, periodic glycosylated hemoglobin A1c tests) must be signed and placed by a physician.

Health care organizations may benefit from engaging with their physicians in creating optimal policies on email work, in addition to helping them with such work. (e.g delegation to non-physician clinicians–Ed.)

Add to that phone calls and endless prior authorizations from insurers–should we have a ‘Be Kind To Your Doctor Week’? Hat tip to HIStalk.

EHRs: The Bridge to Nowhere–other than despair. An investigative Must Read on ‘an unholy mess’.

April 4, 2019 | by

If you hate your EHR, think it’s swallowing your information, adding hours to your day, and if you don’t watch it, you’ll make an error, you’re not a Luddite. You’re right. An exhaustive investigation by Fortune and Kaiser Health News (KHN) concludes that it’s ‘an unholy mess’. In fact, even if you are not a physician or clinical staff, it will make you wonder what was going on the collective brains of the digerati, Newt Gingrich, Barack Obama–and the US government–in thinking that EHRs would actually “cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year,” committing $36 billion to pursuing the ‘shovel-ready’ HITECH stimulus in the depths of the 2008-9 recession. Perhaps the shovel should have been used on a body part. Now if only those billions went towards an interoperable, useful, and national system rather than a money giveaway–which even Farzad Mostashari, then ONC deputy director and later director, now admits was “utterly infeasible to get to in a short time frame.” (Mr. Mostashari is now head of Aledade, counseling those mostly independent practices which lined up–hungry or terrified–for meaningful use EHR subsidies on how they can continue to survive.) Even the vendors were a bit queasy, but nothing was stopping HITECH. (Your Editor was an observer of the struggle.)

Now that we have been living with them for over a decade, EHRs have been found culpable of:

  • Soaring error rates, especially in medication and lab results
  • Increasing patient safety risks in lack of pass-through of critical information
  • Corporate secrecy, enforced by system non-disclosures, around failures
  • Lack of real interoperability–even with regional HIEs, which only exchange parts of records
  • Incomplete information
  • A very real cognitive burden on doctors–an Annals of Family Medicine study calculated that an average of 5.9 hours of a primary care doctor’s 11.4 hour working day was spent on the EHR
  • Alert fatigue
  • Note bloat
  • Plain old difficulty or unsuitability (ask any psychiatrist or neurologist)
  • A main cause of doctor burnout, depression, and fatigue–right up to high suicide rates, estimated at one US physician per day
  • Lack of patient contact (why the scribes are making a good living)
  • All those dropdowns and windows? Great until you click on the wrong one and find yourself making a mistake or in the wrong record.

Not even the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is immune. Seema Verma’s husband, a physician, collapsed in the Indianapolis airport. She couldn’t collect his records without great difficulty and piecing together. When he was discharged, he received a few papers and a CD-ROM containing some medical images, but without key medical records.

A long read for lunch or the weekend. Death by a Thousand Clicks: Where Electronic Health Records Went Wrong. Also the accompanying essay by Clifton Leaf. 

Want to attract Google Ventures to your health tech? Look to these seven areas.

May 23, 2017 | by

The GV Hot 7, especially the finally-acknowledged physician burnout. Google Ventures’ (GV) Dr. Krishna Yeshwant, a GV general partner leading the Life Sciences team, is interested in seven areas, according to his interview in Business Insider (UK):

  • Physician burnout, which has become epidemic as doctors (and nurses) spend more and more time with their EHRs versus patients. This is Job #1 in this Editor’s opinion.

Dr. Yeshwant’s run-on question to be solved is: “Where are the places where we can intervene to continue getting the advantages of the electronic medical record while respecting the fact that there’s a human relationship that most people have gotten into this for that’s been eroded by the fact that there’s now a computer that’s a core part of the conversation.” (Your job–parse this sentence!–Ed.)

Let’s turn to Dr. Robert Wachter for a better statement of the problem. This Editor was present for his talk at the NYeC Digital Health Conference [TTA 19 Jan] and these are quoted from his slides: “Burnout is associated with computerized order entry use and perceived ‘clerical burden’ [of EHRs and other systems]”. He also cites the digital squeeze on physicians and the Productivity Paradox, noted by economist Robert Solow as “You can see the computer age everywhere except in the productivity statistics.” In other words, EHRs are a major thief of time. What needs to happen? “Improvements in the technology and reimagining the work itself.” Citing Mr. Solow again, the Productivity Paradox in healthcare will take 15-20 years to resolve. Dr. Wachter’s talk is here. (more…)

Connected health to help cure–physician burnout?

October 6, 2015 | by

Here’s an interesting proposition: digital health tools such as telemedicine, telehealth and mobile health can help to reduce physician burnout. Except that if one is looking for support points in this HCI Healthcare Informatics article, one would be hard pressed. There’s no link to QuantiaMD‘s study (a 225,000-member US physician community), an inexplicable lapse. Your persistent Editor tracked it down, and found it connects the dots a bit more. It starts with the proposition that nearly half of doctors wouldn’t recommend medicine as a career to their children, then identifies a key frustration–“healthcare technologies that sap time and money are among the top reasons.” The solution? Other “emerging technologies—in the form of telemedicine, mHealth tools, and connected health devices—may actually help reverse this trend of physician burnout.” The paper then describes how telemedicine virtual visits, giving patients telehealth tools which will aid compliance and monitoring, especially with new treatments, and the opportunity to improve care all are Good Things. But not entirely convincing that these can be effective in mitigating the complex reasons why behind doctor burnout. Read the QuantiaMD study for yourself. Hat tip to Stuart Hochron, MD, JD of Practice Unite via LinkedIn