Leadership program with skills training for general practitioners was highly accepted without improving job satisfaction: the cluster randomized IMPROVEjob study
Authors: Degen Lukas , Göbel Julian , Minder Karen , Seifried-Dübon Tanja , Werners Brigitte , Grot Matthias , Rind Esther , Pieper Claudia , Eilerts Anna-Lisa , Schröder Verena , Siegel Achim , Hüsing Anika , Jöckel Karl-Heinz , Rieger Monika A. ,   IMPROVEjob Research Cooperation, Weltermann B. , Minder K. , Degen L. , Göbel J. , Schmidt M. , Dreher A. , Kasten S. , Junne F. , Seifried-Dübon T. , Stuber F. , Zipfel S. , Werners B. , Grot M. , Imhoff L. , Block J. , Rieger M. , Rind E. , Wagner A. , Tsarouha E. , Burgess S. , Siegel A. , Jöckel K. H. , Pieper C. , Schröder V. , Brinkmann M. , Eilerts A. L. , Weltermann Birgitta M. 
Published: October 2022

AbstractLeadership has become an increasingly important issue in medicine as leadership skills, job satisfaction and patient outcomes correlate positively. Various leadership training and physician psychological well-being programmes have been developed internationally, yet no standard is established in primary care. The IMPROVEjob leadership program was developed to improve job satisfaction among German general practitioners and practice personnel. Its acceptance and effectiveness were evaluated. The IMPROVEjob intervention is a participatory, interdisciplinary and multimodal leadership intervention that targets leadership, workflows and communication in general practices using three elements: (1) two leadership workshops with skills training; (2) a toolbox with printed and online material, and (3) a 9-month implementation phase supported by facilitators. A cluster-randomised trial with a waiting-list control evaluated the effectiveness on the primary outcome job satisfaction assessed by the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (range 0–100). A mixed-methods approach with questionnaires and participant interviews evaluated the acceptance of the intervention and factors influencing the implementation of intervention content. Statistical analyses respected the clustered data structure. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated intervention adjustments: online instead of on-site workshops, online material instead of facilitator practice visits. Overall, 52 of 60 practices completed the study, with altogether 70 practice leaders, 16 employed physicians, and 182 practice assistants. According to an intention-to-treat analysis, job satisfaction decreased between baseline and follow-up (not significantly) in the total study population and in both study arms, while the subgroup of practice leaders showed a non-significant increase. A mixed multilevel regression model showed no effect of the intervention on job satisfaction (b = − 0.36, p > 0.86), which was influenced significantly by a greater sense of community (b = 0.14, p < 0.05). The acceptance of the IMPROVEjob workshops was high, especially among practice leaders compared to assistants (1 = best to 5 = worst): skills training 1.78 vs. 2.46, discussions within the practice team 1.87 vs. 2.28, group discussions 1.96 vs. 2.21. The process evaluation revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic complicated change processes and delayed the implementation of intervention content in practice routines. The workshops within the participatory IMPROVEjob intervention were rated very positively but the multimodal intervention did not improve job satisfaction 9 months into the pandemic. Qualitative data showed an impairment of implementation processes by the unforeseeable COVID pandemic.Trial registration Registration number: DRKS00012677 on 16/10/2019.