Report on a Formalized Case-Based Peer Support Program to Improve Physician Well-being

Abstract

Minimal data exist about the relationship between rates of malpractice and quality review-related stress and the outcome of formal peer support programs. This one-year quality improvement pilot study used pre-and post-design to evaluate physicians’ satisfaction with a case-based peer support program. A needs assessment survey informed the structure and content. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Stress responses of participating physicians were compared using the exact McNemar’s test. In the needs assessment survey, of 63 respondents, 59% reported having experienced a quality case review, 95% of 39 respondents reported emotional stress because of this experience, and 89% believed faculty peer support would have been helpful. Regarding litigation, 56% reported having been sued, 91% reported emotional stress, and 86% would have found peer support helpful. Fifteen peer support pairings were made, and 11 accepted the support. Post-intervention, 100% of respondents who accepted peer support reported that the program is a valuable resource.