Interprofessional Group Intervention to Promote Faculty Wellbeing and Engagement

March 10, 2020 updated by: Susan Hata, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital
A randomized trial of an interprofessional intervention to reduce burnout and enhance professional engagement in physicians, certified nurse midwives, and nurse practitioners.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

To test the hypothesis that an intervention involving self-facilitated interprofessional group meetings would result in improvement in wellbeing and to determine whether use of a written curriculum provided increased benefit, the following study is conducted:

Practicing clinical faculty in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Massachusetts General Hospital were recruited to participate in three monthly small groups over dinner. Participants were randomized to a control group, which met without any specified guidelines for discussion content, or to receive an intervention which consisted of a one-page discussion guide addressing themes relevant to challenges in the healthcare environment: reframing challenging patient interactions; embracing uncertainty in work; and coping with errors, near misses, and bad outcomes. Outcomes included burnout, empowerment and engagement in work, stress from uncertainty assessed using validated metrics, and perception of of collegiality and community.

All participants were also offered the option of participating in evaluation of biomarkers. To test the hypothesis that an increased sense of bonding and relational connection, and reduced stress levels would be reflected by changes in hormone levels during the meeting and over the course of the study. Faculty who opted into this portion of the study gave the following samples:

Urine Oxytocin before and after the first and third group meetings Salivary Oxytocin before and after the first and third group meetings Salivary Cortisol before and after the first and third group meetings Hair Cortisol at the beginning of the study and at the end of the study (a roughly three month interval).

An optional focus group was conducted after the three monthly sessions.

All participants signed a consent form prior to participating in the study.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
25

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02114
        • Massachusetts General Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Physican in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Nurse Practitioner in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Certified Nurse Midwife in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Massachusetts General Hospital

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Intervention
Providers were placed in small groups and given the intervention of a discussion guide to facilitate discussion.
Other: Discussion Guide
Written list of prompts to facilitate discussion
No Intervention: Control
Providers were placed in small groups and not given a discussion guide to facilitate discussion.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Burnout
Time Frame: Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.

Change from baseline in 2 item Maslach Burnout Inventory scores before and after the intervention.

Minimum score: 2; Maximum score: 14 Higher score = more burnt out (worse outcome)
Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Stress from Uncertainty
Time Frame: Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Change in scores on Physician Response to Uncertainty Scale before and after intervention Minimum score: 6; Maximum score: 90 Higher score = increased stress due to uncertainty (worse outcome)
Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Work Engagement
Time Frame: Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Change in scores on Utrecht Work Engagement Scale before and after intervention Minimum score: 0; Maximum score: 54 Higher score = higher engagement at work (better outcome)
Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Urine oxytocin
Time Frame: Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later.
Change from baseline in the level of urine oxytocin before and after each intervention. This is an exploratory study so the maximum and minimum values are not known, and any change up or down is interesting.
Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later.
Salivary Oxytocin
Time Frame: Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later
Change from baseline in the level of salivary oxytocin before and after each intervention. This is an exploratory study so the maximum and minimum values are not known, and any change up or down is interesting.
Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later
Salivary Cortisol
Time Frame: Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later
Change from baseline in the level of salivary cortisol before and after each intervention. This is an exploratory study so the maximum and minimum values are not known, and any change up or down is interesting.
Two samples were taken one hour apart at baseline, and this was repeated three months later
Hair Cortisol
Time Frame: Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Change from baseline in hair cortisol levels. Maximum and minimum levels are not known and any change up or down is interesting.
Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Work Empowerment Scale
Time Frame: Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.
Minimum score: 12; Maximum score: 84 Change from baseline on Work Empowerment Scale before and after intervention. Higher score = higher empowerment at work (better outcome)
Change over the three month study period. Baseline measurement and immediately after final intervention.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Massachusetts General Hospital

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
May 1, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
September 30, 2018

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 30, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
March 3, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 10, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 12, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
March 12, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 10, 2020

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
March 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 2018P000415

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings