The NIH Review Article About Physician Retention Shows They are Still Clueless
I was excited to see this article from the NIH called Hospital doctor turnover and retention: a systematic review and new research pathway.
Finally, hospitals are thinking about trying to keep their doctors. Unfortunately, the researchers who did this review really have no clue where to go with this problem. I do.
First, a couple of quotes from the piece:
Globally, hospital doctor turnover is a prevalent issue that is influenced by a variety of factors. However, a lack of focus on doctors who remain in their job hinders a comprehensive understanding of the issue. Conducting “stay interviews” with doctors could provide valuable insight into what motivates them to remain and what could be done to enhance their work conditions.
Lack of focus on doctors who remain is a major blind spot for hospitals. NONE of them have physician retention programs. Stay interviews may help, but what the article doesn’t say is that the exit interviews don’t. Why? Because the doctor will not tell the truth because he or she is worried about repercussions and getting the next job.
Focussing on the reasons why employees remain with an organisation can have significant social repercussions. When organisations invest in gaining an understanding of what motivates their employees to stay in the job, they are better able to establish a positive work environment that likely to promote employee well-being and job satisfaction. This can result in enhanced job performance, increased productivity and higher employee retention rates, all of which are advantageous to the organisation and its employees.
These are not misspellings. The authors are from Ireland, but the paper is a review of 51 papers that empirically examined hospital doctor turnover and retention.
Investing in why doctors stay is very important. Making a positive work environment is critical, but hospitals have no idea how to do that. My book gives all the strategies that may work.
The review concludes that there has been little consideration of the retention, as opposed to the turnover, of hospital doctors. We argue that more expansive methodological approaches would be useful, with more qualitative approaches likely to be particularly useful. We also call on future researchers to consider focussing further on why doctors remain in posts when so many are leaving.
I spent years considering physician retention. I was hostage to two hospitals as an employed physician for 15 years! I know what worked and what didn’t. I also spent years studying what other industries do to keep their good employees. That’s why I wrote the book.
The ONE thing this article dances around about is a methodological approach to figuring out how to improve physician retention. I found it, and it is called the Net Promoter Score. Once again, due to doctors being worried about retribution, they will not do this unless it is done by a third party and kept anonymous.
Overall, it wasn’t the worst published article/study/review about Physician Retention, but there are a bunch of missing pieces to their analysis. The number one question to know is if the CEO/hospital actually WANTS to retain doctors. Many don’t care. They feel doctors can be replaced by midlevels and turnover is just part of the game. That’s a full stop. There is no helping them. For those who truly want to retain their good doctors, there are answers. Read my book or get in touch with me.
Recent Comments