The classic website will no longer be available as of June 25, 2024. Please use the modernized ClinicalTrials.gov.
Working…
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

Investigating the Impact of Professional Development Coaching for Faculty

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.
 
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05036993
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : September 8, 2021
Last Update Posted : March 17, 2023
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Kerri Palamara McGrath, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital

Brief Summary:

Coaching is used in business and many other career paths to help the individual define and create their own goals and strategies for achieving those goals. In 2017 the investigators began to investigate the impact of coaching compared to non-coached peers in a randomized trial among non-internal medicine residency programs and internal medicine subspecialty fellowship to understand the impact of this program and its generalizability. Data from all these studies has suggested that coaching is effective in allowing trainees to understand their development over time, find meaning and purpose in their work, and identify their strengths and how to use these to overcome challenges and stressors. Additionally, there is a benefit to the coaches themselves, who can connect with other faculty coaches in a rewarding way, that provides faculty development in leadership development and positive psychology, and space to interact with a group of like-minded physicians.

From the work the investigators have done with housestaff through the MGH Professional Development Coaching Program we have seen a tremendous interest from faculty members for access to similar services. Prior studies show improvement in faculty burnout and engagement at work through small-group sessions focused on reducing distress and promoting well-being. The investigators have also seen that while the training of novice coaches in positive psychology is sufficient to begin crucial conversations about drivers of well-being, the need for more in-depth coaching with certified coaches exists. The goal of this project is to expand coaching to MGH faculty members and provide more in-depth training for coaches through the International Federation of Coaching, through the Wellcoaches Coach Training Program. This is a unique approach to professional development within the field of medicine that has not yet been employed or studied. There was a recent publication of professional coaches hired outside of the field for faculty development, but there has been no training of medical colleagues with professional coaching skills. This has the potential to provide new data for the field and become a sustainable intervention for MGH in addressing ongoing professional development for our faculty and the burnout epidemic. Finally, this can serve as model for implementation in other institutions.


Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase
Burnout Burnout, Professional Behavioral: Coaching Not Applicable

Show Show detailed description

Layout table for study information
Study Type : Interventional  (Clinical Trial)
Actual Enrollment : 155 participants
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
Intervention Model Description: Randomized controlled trial with crossover to intervention
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
Official Title: A Randomized Trial to Investigate the Impact of Professional Development Coaching for MGH Faculty
Actual Study Start Date : June 5, 2021
Actual Primary Completion Date : April 1, 2022
Actual Study Completion Date : August 1, 2022

Arm Intervention/treatment
Experimental: Intervention
Coaching
Behavioral: Coaching
Faculty will be paired with a certified coach who is also a faculty member and receive 6 sessions of coaching over 3 months

Experimental: Control
Control, Coaching later
Behavioral: Coaching
Faculty will be paired with a certified coach who is also a faculty member and receive 6 sessions of coaching over 3 months




Primary Outcome Measures :
  1. Burnout [ Time Frame: 3 months ]
    Professional Fulfillment Index;Items are scored 0 to 4. Each dimension is treated as a continuous variable. Scale scores are calculated by averaging the item scores of all the items within the corresponding scale. Scale scores can then be multiplied by 25 to create a scale range from 0 to 100. Higher score on the professional fulfillment scale is more favorable. In contrast, higher scores on the work exhaustion or interpersonal disengagement scales are less favorable. Dichotomous burnout categories are determined from the average item score (range 0 to 4) of all 10 burnout items (work exhaustion and interpersonal disengagement), using a cut-point of 1.33. Dichotomous professional flfillment is recommended at an average item score cut-point of >3.0.

  2. Professional Fulfillment [ Time Frame: 3 months ]
    Professional Fulfillment Index; Items are scored 0 to 4. Each dimension is treated as a continuous variable. Scale scores are calculated by averaging the item scores of all the items within the corresponding scale. Scale scores can then be multiplied by 25 to create a scale range from 0 to 100. Higher score on the professional fulfillment scale is more favorable. In contrast, higher scores on the work exhaustion or interpersonal disengagement scales are less favorable. Dichotomous burnout categories are determined from the average item score (range 0 to 4) of all 10 burnout items (work exhaustion and interpersonal disengagement), using a cut-point of 1.33. Dichotomous professional flfillment is recommended at an average item score cut-point of >3.0.

  3. Engagement [ Time Frame: 3 months ]

    Ultrecht Engagement Scale; The UWES utilizes three scales to determine the level of work engagement:

    Vigor, dedication, and absorption. It is a test of how to measure work engagement both on an individual and on group level:Score ranges from 0 to 6 for each item; scores are summed. Higher is better.


  4. Work Relationships [ Time Frame: 3 months ]
    Negative Impact of Work on Relationships; 4 questions with Likert scale 0 to 4, responses summed, higher is worse


Secondary Outcome Measures :
  1. Quality of Life Rating [ Time Frame: 3 months ]
    Quality of Life scale - rate quality of life on a scale of 0 to 100, higher is better

  2. Likelihood to leave or reduce [ Time Frame: 3 months ]
    Likelihood to leave or reduce time, report likelihood to leave the institution or reduce clinical time on likert scale 0 to 5; higher is worse.



Information from the National Library of Medicine

Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contacts provided below. For general information, Learn About Clinical Studies.


Layout table for eligibility information
Ages Eligible for Study:   Child, Adult, Older Adult
Sexes Eligible for Study:   All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   Yes
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • current MGPO Faculty member

Exclusion Criteria:

  • n/a

Information from the National Library of Medicine

To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT05036993


Locations
Layout table for location information
United States, Massachusetts
Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02114
Sponsors and Collaborators
Massachusetts General Hospital
Investigators
Layout table for investigator information
Principal Investigator: Kerri Palamara, MD Massachusetts General Hospital
Layout table for additonal information
Responsible Party: Kerri Palamara McGrath, MD, Director, Center for Physician Well-being, Massachusetts General Hospital
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05036993    
Other Study ID Numbers: 2019P003587
First Posted: September 8, 2021    Key Record Dates
Last Update Posted: March 17, 2023
Last Verified: March 2023
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
Plan to Share IPD: No

Layout table for additional information
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product: No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product: No
Keywords provided by Kerri Palamara McGrath, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital:
physician burnout
physician well-being
coaching
faculty development
engagement
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Layout table for MeSH terms
Burnout, Professional
Burnout, Psychological
Stress, Psychological
Behavioral Symptoms
Occupational Stress
Occupational Diseases