Want to take quizzes and track your credits?
What is the prevalence of burnout and depression among general surgery trainees in North Carolina, and do residents’ and attendings’ perceptions of these conditions differ?
In this cross-sectional survey of 92 general residents and 55 attendings, the prevalence of burnout and risk of depression among general surgery residents were high (58 of 77 [75%] and 30 of 76 [39%], respectively). Residents and faculty members significantly underestimated the prevalence of burnout and depression but identified the same barriers to seeking treatment.
Discrepancies exist in actual and perceived levels of burnout and depression among residents and attendings, but a common understanding of barriers to care provides an opportunity for the development of practical interventions.
Prior studies demonstrate a high prevalence of burnout and depression among surgeons. Limited data exist regarding how these conditions are perceived by the surgical community.
To measure prevalence of burnout and depression among general surgery trainees and to characterize how residents and attendings perceive these conditions.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This cross-sectional study used unique, anonymous surveys for residents and attendings that were administered via a web-based platform from November 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017. All residents and attendings in the 6 general surgery training programs in North Carolina were invited to participate.
Main Outcomes and Measures
The prevalence of burnout and depression among residents was assessed using validated tools. Burnout was defined by high emotional exhaustion or depersonalization on the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Depression was defined by a score of 10 or greater on the Patient Health Questionnaire–9. Linear and logistic regression models were used to assess predictive factors for burnout and depression. Residents’ and attendings’ perceptions of these conditions were analyzed for significant similarities and differences.
In this study, a total of 92 residents and 55 attendings responded. Fifty-eight of 77 residents with complete responses (75%) met criteria for burnout, and 30 of 76 (39%) met criteria for depression. Of those with burnout, 28 of 58 (48%) were at elevated risk of depression (P = .03). Nine of 77 residents (12%) had suicidal ideation in the past 2 weeks. Most residents (40 of 76 [53%]) correctly estimated that more than 50% of residents had burnout, whereas only 13 of 56 attendings (23%) correctly estimated this prevalence (P < .001). Forty-two of 83 residents (51%) and 42 of 56 attendings (75%) underestimated the true prevalence of depression (P = .002). Sixty-six of 73 residents (90%) and 40 of 51 attendings (78%) identified the same top 3 barriers to seeking care for burnout: inability to take time off to seek treatment, avoidance or denial of the problem, and negative stigma toward those seeking care.
Conclusions and Relevance
The prevalence of burnout and depression was high among general surgery residents in this study. Attendings and residents underestimated the prevalence of these conditions but acknowledged common barriers to seeking care. Discrepancies in actual and perceived levels of burnout and depression may hinder wellness interventions. Increasing understanding of these perceptions offers an opportunity to develop practical solutions.
Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates
JN Learning™ from JAMA Network is your new home for CME and MOC from a source you trust. Earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from relevant articles, audio, and Clinical Challenge image quizzes, explore interactives and videos, and – depending on your specialty or state – have your MOC points automatically transferred to the relevant board. Learn more about CME
Accepted for Publication: February 11, 2018.
Corresponding Author: Michael L. Williford, MD, Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 9 Piccadilly Ct, Durham, NC 27713 (email@example.com).
Published Online: May 2, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0974
Author Contributions: Dr Scarlet had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Study concept and design: Williford, Fine, Clancy, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Williford, Scarlet, Meyers, Luckett, Fine, Goettler, Green, Hildreth, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Drafting of the manuscript: Williford, Scarlet, Meyers, Fine, Green, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Williford, Scarlet, Meyers, Luckett, Goettler, Clancy, Hildreth, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Statistical analysis: Williford, Scarlet, Luckett, Fine.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Meyers, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Study supervision: Meyers, Green, Hildreth, Meltzer-Brody, Farrell.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
You currently have no searches saved.