Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, 02114, United States
NCT Number: NCT05036993
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.
Looking for future studies?
Notify MeAll sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Boston, Massachusetts, 02114, United States
Objectives:
Hypothesis: MGPO Faculty will benefit from a Professional Development Coaching Program in the following ways:
III. SUBJECT SELECTION
IV. SUBJECT ENROLLMENT
MGPO Faculty will be sent an email to make them aware of the program for voluntary enrollment, including both the opportunity to receive coaching in the trial or to become a trained coach. These surveys will serve no evaluative purpose in their job performance. It will be clearly described that their participation is not mandatory. Participants interested in receiving coaching will be placed into 2 groups via simple randomization. Randomization will be carefully done to ensure gender and department other demographics are balanced between the groups. Participants interested in becoming a trained coach will fill out a short application of interest from which 15 individuals will be selected to participate in coach training.
V. STUDY PROCEDURES
VI. BIOSTATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Demographic data including gender, number of years as faculty and department will be collected. Survey data will be collected based on scales previously noted.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Faculty will be paired with a certified coach who is also a faculty member and receive 6 sessions of coaching over 3 months
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.
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.
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.
Time frame: 3 months
Negative Impact of Work on Relationships; 4 questions with Likert scale 0 to 4, responses summed, higher is worse
Time frame: 3 months
Quality of Life scale - rate quality of life on a scale of 0 to 100, higher is better
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.
Massachusetts General Hospital
Other
A Randomized Trial to Investigate the Impact of Professional Development Coaching for MGH Faculty
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT05394051
Behavior, Behavioral Symptoms
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04970771
Behavior, Behavioral Symptoms
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
View Trial DetailsNCT04347811
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders
New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05942469
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial Details