The Chief Wellness Officer: A long overdue catalyst for systemic change in Emergency Medicine.

GOALS: The American healthcare system is amid a burnout epidemic, worsened by COVID, that must be addressed expeditiously and with high priority. The burden Emergency Physicians encountered before and during the pandemic is well known, with countless healthcare workers exiting the work force. A Chief Wellness Officer (CWO) is a senior leader who works primarily to cultivate organisational wellness and to foster and promote a culture of well-being throughout an institution. Specifically, the CWO assists the health system leadership promote clinician engagement and address clinician burnout. This paper explores the status of existing CWOs, and cites the benefits, impacts, and barriers to implementation of a CWO, with focus on the field of Emergency Medicine (EM). METHODS: A steering committee of wellness experts was formed from a national EM organisation. A purposive search and literature review using search terms relating to CWOs was completed. Publications were examined for relevance and recency. The committee created an online questionnaire surveying current US CWOs, conducted personal interviews, and met through regular focused meetings. A framework delineating the role of a CWO as an organisation evolves from instituting novice wellness interventions to expert organisational innovations was created. PRINCIPLE FINDINGS: Despite their title, CWOs are not regularly included in c-suite decisions. Barriers to instituting a CWO include perceived financial cost, the medical system itself, and physician resistance. Defining and measuring objective return on investment may be a solution to overcoming barriers. CWOs who create comprehensive institutional wellness innovations bring organisations to the highest proficient and expert levels of wellness practices, positively affecting physician engagement and deflecting burnout. CWOs instituting novice and beginner levels of wellness interventions, especially in EM, only modestly impact individual wellness practices. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: A CWO and team with an organisational voice and a C-suite stakeholder's seat are essential to centralising and leading effective wellness efforts and innovations in EM and other specialities. This team will improve the work environment and culture and begin to fix our broken healthcare system and providers.

Emergency Department Virtual Happy Hour: A Novel Approach to Peer Group Support During a Pandemic.

Introduction Communities responded to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with mandatory social-distancing regulations. Pandemic and disaster research shows that social isolation can often cause negative emotions and medical provider burnout. The primary objective of this study was to create and evaluate a novel wellness program, the Happy Hour Wellness Initiative (HHWI), based on peer support group concepts to foster resilience for emergency healthcare providers in response to a novel disaster. Methods The study was performed at a large emergency department with physicians, advanced practice providers, and staff invited to attend weekly "virtual happy hour" sessions. Participants individually opted into each of the six weekly sessions, with no obligation to attend. The program was designed based on the tenets of a peer support group and implemented by video conferencing. Participants completed a demographic questionnaire and answered open-ended questions after the six-session HHWI ended. Results Of the 40 survey respondents, 30% reported feeling stressed and 40% felt isolated at the early declaration of the pandemic. Regarding the HHWI, 90% of participants had no expectations from the HHWI, but 90% reported that their favorite part of the initiative was the feeling of togetherness. Most participants (95%) requested a continuation of the HHWI, even if not by a video-conferencing platform, and 90% reported feeling sad after the HHWI ended. Conclusion The emergency department HHWI was a welcome opportunity for employees to combat stress and anxiety brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing. The initiative fostered team building, comradery, group advocacy, stress relief, and cheerfulness. The initiative was so greatly welcomed as a tool for wellness that almost all participants recommended that the HHWI should be available, not just in times of hardship, but year-round. The HHWI has provided a new approach to promote wellness in emergency care providers using a peer support group.

Survey-based Evaluation of Resident and Attending Financial Literacy.

INTRODUCTION: Physician finances are linked to wellness and burnout. However, few physicians receive financial management education. We sought to determine the financial literacy and educational need of attending and resident physician at an academic emergency medicine (EM) residency. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional, survey study at an academic EM residency. We devised a 49-question survey with four major domains: demographics (16 questions); Likert-scale questions evaluating value placed on personal finances (3 questions); Likert-scale questions evaluating perceived financial literacy (11 questions); and a financial literacy test based on previously developed and widely used financial literacy questions (19 questions). We administered the survey to EM attendings and residents. We analyzed the data using descriptive statistics and compared attending and resident test question responses. RESULTS: A total of 44 residents and 24 attendings responded to the survey. Few (9.0% of residents, 12.5% of attendings) reported prior formal financial education. However, most respondents (70.5% of residents and 79.2% of attendings) participated in financial self-learning. On a five-point Likert scale (not at all important: very important), respondents felt that financial independence (4.7 ± 0.8) and their finances (4.7±0.8) were important for their well-being. Additionally, they valued being prepared for retirement (4.7±0.9). Regarding perceived financial literacy (very uncomfortable: very comfortable), respondents had the lowest comfort level with investing in the stock market (2.7±1.5), applying for a mortgage (2.8±1.6), and managing their retirement (3.0±1.4). Residents scored significantly lower than attendings on the financial literacy test (70.8% vs 79.6%, P<0.01), and residents scored lower on questions pertaining to investment (78.8% v 88.9%, P<0.01) and insurance and taxes (47.0% v 70.8%, P<0.01). Overall, respondents scored lower on questions about retirement (58.8%, P<0.01) and insurance and taxes (54.7%, P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Emergency physicians' value of financial literacy exceeded confidence in financial literacy, and residents reported poorer confidence than attendings. We identified deficiencies in emergency physicians' financial literacy for retirement, insurance, and taxes.

Outcomes of end-stage renal disease patients in the PROCESS trial.

OBJECTIVE: Intravenous fluid administration is a main component of sepsis therapy, but physicians are cautious about giving fluids to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients out of concern for causing volume overload. We compared the outcomes of septic shock patients with and without ESRD and evaluated the association between early intravenous fluid administration and outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed patients enrolled in the Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock (PROCESS) trial, which studied different resuscitation strategies for early septic shock. Stratifying for ESRD, we compared patient characteristics, course of care, and outcomes between ESRD and non-ESRD. Using multivariable logistic regression, we determined the association between 6-hour total fluid volume (> = 30 mL/kg vs < 30 mL/kg) from preenrollment and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 84 ESRD and 1257 non-ESRD patients. ESRD patients had a higher median Charlson Comorbidity score (5 vs 2, P < .001), higher median acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score (26.5 vs 20.0, P < .001), and lower 6-hour intravenous fluid administration (54.7 vs 68.3 mL/kg, P < .001). Ninety-day mortality (33.3% vs 29.3%, P = .43) and intubation rate (31.0% vs 33.4%, P = .64) did not differ between groups. Fewer ESRD received > = 30 mL/kg (66.6% vs 86.7% P < .001). For ESRD, receipt of > = 30 mL/kg intravenous fluid did not alter any outcome. For non-ESRD patients, receiving   ≥30 mL/kg of intravenous fluid was associated with increased 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.61). CONCLUSIONS: In the PROCESS trial, ESRD patients had similar outcomes to non-ESRD patients. Although ESRD patients received less intravenous fluid administration, most received over 30 mL/kg in the first 6 hours. In contrast to non-ESRD patients, receiving  ≥30 mL/kg of intravenous fluid was not associated with worse outcomes in ESRD.