Job Satisfaction Among Pain Medicine Physicians in the US

Abstract

Purpose

Data are lacking on the factors that contribute to job satisfaction among pain medicine physicians. We sought to determine how sociodemographic and professional characteristics relate to job satisfaction among pain medicine physicians.

Methods

In this nationwide, multicenter, cross-sectional observational study, an electronic questionnaire related to job satisfaction was emailed in 2021 to pain medicine physicians who were members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists or the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience. The 28-item questionnaire asked physicians about sociodemographic and professional factors. Eight questions related to job satisfaction were based on a 10-point Likert scale, and 1 question was a binary (yes/no) variable. Differences in responses based on sociodemographic and professional factors were assessed with the Kruskal–Wallis rank sum test for Likert scale questions and with the Pearson χ² test for yes/no questions.

Results

We determined that several variables, including gender, parental status, geographic location, specialty, years of practice, and volume of patients, are associated with pain medicine physicians’ outlook on job satisfaction. Overall, 74.9% of respondents surveyed would choose pain medicine as a specialty again.

Conclusion

High rates of poor job satisfaction persist among pain medicine physicians. This survey study identified several sociodemographic and professional factors that are associated with job satisfaction among pain medicine physicians. By identifying physicians at high risk for poor job satisfaction, healthcare leadership and occupational health agencies can aim to protect physicians’ well-being, enhance working conditions, and raise awareness about burnout.

Keywords:

• economics
• outcomes
• pain management

Abbreviations

ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; ASPN, American Society of Pain and Neuroscience; PM&R, physical medicine and rehabilitation.

Data Sharing Statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its Supplementary Materials.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

Our study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. The study was granted a waiver for informed consent because it did not evaluate new or existing patient records, did not pose a risk that was greater than minimal, and was deemed to be compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act because safeguards were in place to protect the personal health information of the participants.

Consent for Publication

Informed consent was waived for this study because patient records were not involved. All the participants were physicians who voluntarily completed the questionnaire, and no personally identifiable information was involved in the analysis.

Acknowledgment

Randall J. Fritz, DVM, Mayo Clinic, substantively edited the manuscript. The Scientific Publications staff at Mayo Clinic provided proofreading, administrative, and clerical support.

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the reported work in 1 or more areas, including conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, and analysis and interpretation; took part in drafting, revising, or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

Dr Strand is a consultant for Nimbus Therapeutics, Nevro Corp, and Abbott Laboratories. Dr. D’Souza receives grant funding from Nevro Corp and Saol Therapeutics. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

No funding was required for this project.