Addressing Healthcare Professional Burnout: A Quality Improvement Intervention

Abstract

Background: Burnout is a substantial phenomenon across healthcare settings, affecting more than half of healthcare professionals and leading to negative patient and health system outcomes. Infusion center professionals (ICPs) are at increased risk of burnout attributed to high patient volume and acuity levels. Strategies to address burnout have been developed and prioritized by the American Medical Association (AMA), the World Health Organization, and other organizations.

Aims: This quality improvement project aimed to address perceived burnout, job-related stress, and job satisfaction among nurses, physician assistants, and medical assistants at a large pediatric hospital through integration of two infusion center (IC)-based staff engagement interventions.

Methods: A pre- and post-test study design was used. Existing team huddles in the IC were modified based on the AMA STEPS Forward program recommendations to incorporate appreciative inquiry and recognition into team and department events. Peer recognition was tailored toward institutional core values. The Mini-Z Burnout survey was administered before and 3 months after implementation of both interventions.

Findings: Pre- to post-intervention responses revealed a higher percentage of staff reporting no burnout (57.7% vs. 75%), low levels of job-related stress (58.8% vs. 65.5%), and satisfaction with current job (70.6% vs. 82.8%). Most participants agreed or strongly agreed that structured huddles (69%) and recognition events (82.8%) were beneficial and recommended continuation (65.5% and 82.8%, respectively). Open-ended responses regarding workplace stressors focused heavily on staffing and patient acuity.

Linking evidence to action: Project outcomes support the integration of tailored interventions to reduce burnout among pediatric ICPs. Organizational commitment to addressing burnout can provide incentive to scale up institution-wide staff engagement interventions. Further study is needed to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of such tailored interventions across diverse settings.

Keywords: leadership; management; oncology and cancer; outcome evaluation; program evaluation; quality improvement; quality of care and services; work environment and conditions.