The risk of publicly reporting clinician well-being: Viewpoint

The risk of publicly reporting clinician well-being: Viewpoint

While addressing clinician well-being is important, publicly reporting measures of burnout could be counterproductive, according to two physicians.

Measuring clinician well-being is crucial for identifying contributing factors and understanding how they have changed over time, wrote Jonathan Ripp, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York and Tait Shanafelt, MD, of Palo Alto, Calif.-based Stanford Medicine in an Aug. 8 article published in JAMA.

Some also suggest that using this data to rank hospitals for their clinical well-being could encourage other systems to prioritize well-being. However, negative effects could arise if the measurements are shared publicly in an effort to be transparent, the authors said.

For one, it could be harmful to psychological safety, as "public reporting is likely to rely on shame as a primary motivator for organizations," according to the article.

It could also motivate leaders to collect favorable, rather than honest and accurate, feedback. Similarly, it could motivate clinicians to provide more favorable feedback, as their livelihoods are tied to the success of their organization, the authors said.

To collect and use well-being data most effectively, the authors recommend organizations:

- Collect data anonymously to ensure psychological safety
- Share the data throughout the organization transparently
- Use the data to inform and advance efforts to improve work environment