Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research article
  • Open Access
  • Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Canadian family physician job satisfaction - is it changing in an evolving practice environment? An analysis of the 2013 National Physician Survey database

BMC Family Practice201819:100

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-018-0786-6

Received: 11 September 2017

Accepted: 31 May 2018

Published: 23 June 2018

Abstract

Background

To explore the determinants of job satisfaction and work-life balance satisfaction of family physicians in Canada.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of the Canadian 2013 National Physician’s Survey using descriptive statistics and binomial logistic regression. An estimated 34,753 family physicians practicing in Canada at the time of survey administration in 2013 were eligible for the survey. The main outcome measures were respondent satisfaction with professional life and satisfaction with work-life balance.

Results

The survey had a response rate of 17%. Seventy-two percent of respondents were satisfied with their professional lives, and 49% were satisfied with their work-life balance. Male family physicians had lower odds of satisfaction with their work-life balance than their female counterparts (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.82–0.92). Family physicians using an electronic medical record had higher odds of dissatisfaction with their professional lives (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.05–1.22) and work-life balance (OR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.15–1.30) than those not using an EMR. Family physicians not in a focused practice had greater odds of dissatisfaction (OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.50–1.72) with both their professional lives and work-life balance (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.22–1.37) compared to their colleagues who have one or more areas of clinical focus.

Conclusions

Canadian family physicians are more satisfied with their professional lives than with their work-life balance. Novel findings that family physicians with one or more clinical areas of focus are more satisfied with their work and work-life balance satisfaction, and that family physicians using electronic health records are less satisfied with their work and their work-life balance merit further inquiry.

Keywords

  • Family physician
  • Job satisfaction
  • Work-life balance

Background

Job satisfaction has been widely studied in the medical literature, and various tools have been developed to measure physician satisfaction [13]. Physicians as a group appear to be satisfied with their work [47]. A number of determinants that have been shown to influence this satisfaction include the doctor-patient relationship, the provision of quality care, professional autonomy, academic involvement, and the number of hours worked [1, 816]. Work-life balance has been well-researched [1724] as a determinant of job satisfaction in physicians as well, and it has also been recognized as an important contributor to burnout, and an important factor in physician recruitment and retention [17, 25, 26]. It is unclear whether different practice types contribute positively to satisfaction. Rural female physicians in particular report lower job satisfaction than their male or urban counterparts [27] and academic physicians report greater job satisfaction than their non-academic colleagues [11, 28, 29]. The impact of physician satisfaction on patient care has also been investigated [7]. Although there is no clear relationship between physician satisfaction and patient care outcomes, more satisfied physicians have more satisfied patients [9, 30], and there is a significant relationship between low physician satisfaction and higher attrition rates [9].

It is unclear if these practice differences improve or worsen a family physician’s job satisfaction. There has been little to no research looking at these practice factors and their effect on job satisfaction within the family physician community as a whole.

Less is known about factors that influence job satisfaction of family physicians as a subgroup of all physicians [16, 3133]. The literature is even more scarce in the Canadian context [33]. Lepnurm et al. in 2007 provided the most comprehensive analysis of family physician satisfaction in Canada with an emphasis on the variation between rural and urban practitioners [33].

Knowledge about job satisfaction of Canadian family physicians is important as more than four million Canadians lack access to a regular family physician [34], and recruitment and retention of physicians to family medicine is essential to improving access to primary care medicine in this country. Additionally, as the landscape of Canadian family medicine changes with more females entering the profession [35], more family medicine graduates choosing additional third-year training, or focused practices within family medicine (e.g. sports medicine, emergency medicine) [36], and increasing adoption of electronic medical records [37, 38], an adequate understanding of the determinants affecting Canadian family physicians’ job satisfaction may inform health system and policy changes that may keep the current family physician workforce satisfied and consequently aid in recruitment and retention [39].

This study aims to address the current research gap in the field of family physician job satisfaction by investigating the determinants of professional satisfaction and the determinants of satisfaction with work-life balance of family physicians.

Methods

This study was a secondary analysis of the 2013 National Physician Survey (NPS), a collaborative partnership between the Canadian Medical Association (CMA), the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) with the goal of compiling a comprehensive database of the physician workforce in Canada [40]. The survey was developed for the Canadian physician population with input from internal physician committees, external sources (such as the Canadian Institute for Health Information), medical associations and researchers [32]. The 2013 survey had a specific focus, addressing physician employment and workload [32]. It can be viewed in Additional file 1.

Sample and participants

The 2013 survey was an online survey distributed to all licensed physicians in Canada by electronic mail in both English and French. A total of 60,225 physicians were surveyed, with the estimated family physician population at the time of survey delivery being 34,753. Responses were weighted to adjust for non-responses for province of residence, type of physician (family physician vs. specialist), age and gender [40].

Variables

Dependent variables were satisfaction with professional life and satisfaction with the balance between personal and professional commitments. Satisfaction was measured on a five-point Likert scale and responses were transformed into “satisfied” and “dissatisfied” in order to perform the binary regression analysis. The “satisfied” category included responses of satisfied and very satisfied, while the “dissatisfied” category included very dissatisfied, dissatisfied and neutral. Neutral was included in the “dissatisfied” category as the goal was to elicit true satisfaction, and it was felt that neutral did not express a truly satisfied response.

The independent factors most commonly associated with physician job satisfaction in the established literature that could be obtained in the NPS data included income, work-life balance, age, urban/rural factors, number of hours worked per week, and academic involvement [1, 3, 15, 16, 28, 33, 4147]. Variables with equivocal impact on family physician satisfaction were also included in our analyses: gender, age, whether the physician had one or more clinical areas of focus (labeled as “focused” practice), on-call provision, remuneration type, number of years in practice, province of practice and electronic medical record use [1, 3, 15, 16, 28, 33, 4147].

Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22. Descriptive analyses were performed on all of the independent variables and the mean and distribution of the continuous variables was examined. Bivariate analyses were performed for each dependent outcome with each independent variable using chi-square analysis.

After each variable was tested independently as a first step, and found to be significant (p-value < 0.05), binomial logistic regression was used to examine the relationship of the independent variables with each of the two dependent variables (satisfaction with professional life and satisfaction with work-life balance). Goodness of fit of the model was tested using the omnibus test of model coefficients.

Results

Descriptive statistics

The overall survey response rate was 17%. More males responded than females (51.2% vs. 40.3%). The majority of the respondents were between 45 to 64 years of age. The majority (59.3%) resided in Quebec and Ontario with half of the respondents working in an urban or suburban environment. More than half of the respondents described themselves as “focused” practice family physicians (59.6%), and 65.1% were involved in teaching activities. Sixty percent of respondents provided on-call services, and 43.9% of respondents worked 40–60 h per week. Sixty percent of respondents used electronic medical records (EMR) in clinical practice. Seventy-two percent of respondents were satisfied with their professional lives. Forty-nine percent of participants were satisfied with their work-life balance.

A summary of the descriptive statistics can be found in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1

Descriptive statistics – Dependent variables

 

Percent

Number

Satisfaction with professional life

 Satisfied (very satisfied + satisfied)

72

25,009

 Not satisfied (neutral +dissatisfied + very dissatisfied)

20.6

7144

  Missing

7.5

2600

 Total responses

 

32,153

Satisfaction with work-life balance

 Satisfied (very satisfied + satisfied)

49

17,016

 Not satisfied (neutral +dissatisfied+ very dissatisfied)

43.5

15,130

  Missing

7.6

2607

 Total responses

 

32,146

Table 2

Descriptive statistics – Independent variables

 

Percent

Number

Gender

 Male

51.2

17,808

 Female

40.3

14,003

  Missing

8.5

2942

 Total responses

 

31,811

Age group

  < 35

9.9

3448

 35–44

19.6

6826

 45–54

24.5

8528

 55–64

25.8

8974

 65+

11.5

4011

  Missing

8.5

2965

 Total responses

 

31,787

Provincea

 Atlantic provinces

8.2

2839

 QC

24.9

8653

 ON

34.4

11,938

 MB + SK

6.3

2193

 AB

10.9

3800

 BC

14.6

5059

  Missing

0.8

271

 Total responses

 

34,482

Number of years licensed to practice medicine

  <  4 yrs

13.4

4664

 5–9 yrs

11.7

4077

 10–14 yrs

9.7

3373

 15-19 yrs

8.1

2821

 20+ yrs

49.2

17,112

  Missing

7.8

2706

 Total responses

 

32,047

Type of practice: Family medicine only or “focused practice”

 Family medicine only

34.7

12,068

 “Focused” practice

59.6

20,720

  Missing

5.7

1966

 Total responses

 

32,788

Teaching involvement

 Teaches

65.1

22,622

 Does not teach

30.4

10,575

  Missing

4.5

1557

 Total responses

 

33,197

Primary practice population

 Inner city

11.4

3954

 Urban/suburban

50.3

17,495

 Small town

14.3

4971

 Rural/remote

14.4

5016

  Missing

9.5

3317

 Total responses

 

31,436

Method of Payment

  > 90% Fee for service

32.9

11,423

  > 90% Other (salary+capitation+sessional+contract+incentives+other)

17.1

5949

  > 90% Blended model

41.1

14,277

  Missing

8.9

3104

 Total responses

 

31,649

Provides On-Call Service

 Yes

59.0

20,506

 No

32.3

11,230

  Missing

8.7

3017

 Total responses

 

31,736

Use electronic records

 Yes

59.8

20,768

 No

31.9

11,076

  Missing

8.4

2910

 Total responses

 

31,844

Total hours worked per week

  < 20 h

3.9

1341

 20-40 h

21.5

7457

 40–60 h

43.9

15,274

 60–80 h

15.4

5343

 80–100 h

5.0

1745

 100–120 h

2.5

878

  >  120 h

0.4

123

  Missing

7.5

2593

 Total responses

 

32,161

Satisfaction with remuneration model

 Satisfied (very satisfied + satisfied)

53.8

18,685

 Not satisfied (neutral +dissatisfied + very dissatisfied)

38.5

13,389

  Missing

7.7

2679

 Total responses

 

32,074

aAtlantic provinces = Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, QC Quebec, ON Ontario, MB Manitoba, SK Saskatchewan, AB Alberta, BC British Columbia

Bivariate statistics

Chi-square analyses were used to examine the relationships between each of the dependent and independent variables and results of these analyses are summarized in Table 3. Statistically significant associations (p < 0.001) were identified between all tested independent variables and the dependent outcomes. There was a significant association with satisfaction with professional life and gender, age group, province, years of licensure, practice type, teaching involvement, practice population, remuneration method, on-call provision, electronic record use and the number of hours worked per week. Significant associations with satisfaction with work-life balance were found with gender, age group, province, years of licensure, practice type, teaching involvement, practice population, remuneration method, on-call provision, electronic record use and the number of hours worked per week.
Table 3

Associations with professional life and work-life balance Satisfaction

 

Satisfaction with professional life

Satisfaction with work-life balance

% satisfied

% dissatisfied

p-value

% satisfied

% dissatisfied

p-value

Gender

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Male

56.6

53.6

 

56.9

54.9

 

 Female

43.4

46.4

 

43.1

45.1

 

Age group

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

  < 35

11.2

9.6

 

11.9

9.7

 

 35–44

20.5

24.8

 

19.1

24.2

 

 45–54

25.6

31.4

 

23.6

30.5

 

 55–64

28.5

27.4

 

29.3

27.1

 

 65+

14.2

6.8

 

16.2

8.5

 

Provincea

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Atlantic provinces

7.7

8.5

 

8.0

7.8

 

 QC

27.6

16.9

 

26.6

23.7

 

 ON

34.0

38.1

 

34.6

35.3

 

 MB + SK

5.8

7.4

 

5.4

7.1

 

 AB

10.5

13.1

 

11.0

11.2

 

 BC

14.3

16.0

 

14.5

14.9

 

Number of years licensed to practice medicine

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

  <  4 yrs

14.7

14.2

 

14.2

15.0

 

 5–9 yrs

12.3

14.4

 

11.3

14.3

 

 10–14 yrs

10.0

12.4

 

9.6

11.5

 

 15-19 yrs

8.3

10.7

 

8.4

9.3

 

 20+ yrs

54.8

48.3

 

56.5

49.9

 

Practice type

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Family medicine only

33.8

46.8

 

34.8

38.8

 

 “Focused” practice

66.2

53.2

 

65.2

61.2

 

Teaching involvement

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Teaches

70.5

60.8

 

67.0

69.9

 

 Does not teach

29.5

39.2

 

33.0

30.1

 

Primary practice population

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Inner city

12.3

12.8

 

13.1

11.7

 

 Urban/suburban

55.3

57.5

 

56.8

54.8

 

 Small town

16.7

12.8

 

15.4

16.2

 

 Rural/remote

15.7

16.9

 

14.8

17.3

 

Method of Payment

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

  > 90% Fee for service

34.6

40.4

 

36.2

35.7

 

  > 90% Other

18.5

19.2

 

21.1

15.7

 

  > 90% Blended model

46.9

40.4

 

42.6

48.6

 

Provides On-Call service

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Yes

65.6

60.7

 

59.1

70.4

 

 No

34.4

39.3

 

40.9

29.6

 

Use electronic records

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Yes

64.8

67.5

 

62.6

68.5

 

 No

35.2

32.5

 

37.4

31.5

 

Total hours worked per week

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

  < 20 h

4.2

3.7

 

6.4

1.6

 

 20-40 h

23.1

22.7

 

30.5

14.7

 

 40–60 h

48.9

43.1

 

45.4

50.2

 

 60–80 h

15.7

19.8

 

12.1

21.8

 

 80–100 h

4.9

7.5

 

3.5

7.7

 

 100–120 h

2.7

2.7

 

1.9

3.7

 

  >  120 h

0.4

0.4

 

0.3

0.5

 

Satisfaction with remuneration model

  

< 0.001

  

< 0.001

 Satisfied

65.8

31.5

 

72.4

42.3

 

 Dissatisfied

34.2

68.5

 

27.6

57.7

 

aAtlantic provinces = Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, QC Quebec, ON Ontario, MB Manitoba, SK Saskatchewan, AB Alberta, BC British Columbia

Multivariate analysis – dissatisfaction with professional life

Table 4 summarizes the logistic regression analysis for the professional life dissatisfaction variable.
Table 4

Logistic regression – Dissatisfaction with professional life

Variable

Adjusted Odds ratio

95% Confidence Interval

p-value

Gender (female)

Reference

  

 Gender (male)

1.00

0.93–1.07

0.963

Age (>  65 years old)

Reference

  

 Age (< 35 years old)

2.63

2.15–3.21

0.000

 Age (35–44 years old)

2.32

1.96–2.74

0.000

 Age (45–54 years old)

2.51

2.19–2.88

0.000

 Age (55–64 years old)

2.33

2.05–2.65

0.000

Province (BC)a

Reference

  

 Province (Atlantic)

1.12

0.98–1.28

0.110

 Province (QC)

0.76

0.68–0.85

0.000

 Province (ON)

1.06

0.96–1.17

0.262

 Province (MB/SK)

1.41

1.22–1.62

0.000

 Province (AB)

1.14

1.01–1.29

0.036

Number of years licensed (> 20)

Reference

  

 Years licensed (< 4)

0.78

0.67–0.90

0.001

 Years licensed (5–9)

0.94

0.82–1.07

0.312

 Years licensed (10–14)

1.03

0.91–1.18

0.609

 Years licensed (15–19)

1.23

1.08–1.39

0.001

Practice type: “focused” practice

Reference

  

 Practice type: family medicine only

1.61

1.50–1.72

0.000

Teaching involvement (none)

Reference

  

 Teaching involvement (teaches)

0.70

0.65–0.75

0.000

Practice population (rural/remote)

Reference

  

 Practice population (inner city)

0.97

0.86–1.09

0.577

 Practice population (urban)

0.77

0.70–0.84

0.000

 Practice population (small town)

0.62

0.55–0.70

0.000

Remuneration model (blended)

Reference

  

 Remuneration model (fee for service)

0.93

0.86–1.01

0.073

 Remuneration model (other)

1.25

1.14–1.37

0.000

Provides on-call (no)

Reference

  

 Provides on-call (yes)

0.96

0.90–1.03

0.267

EMR use (no)

Reference

  

 EMR use (yes)

1.13

1.05–1.22

0.002

Hours worked per week (> 120)

Reference

  

 Hours per week (< 20)

1.47

0.89–2.41

0.132

 Hours per week (20–40)

1.25

0.78–2.02

0.354

 Hours per week (40–60)

1.14

0.71–1.84

0.577

 Hours per week (60–80)

1.49

0.93–2.40

0.099

 Hours per week (80–100)

1.86

1.14–3.01

0.012

 Hours per week (100–120)

0.85

0.51–1.42

0.538

Income satisfaction (dissatisfied)

Reference

  

 Income satisfaction (satisfied)

0.25

0.24–0.27

0.000

Dependent variable coding: dissatisfaction = 1, satisfaction = 0

aAtlantic provinces = Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, QC Quebec, ON Ontario, MB Manitoba, SK Saskatchewan, AB Alberta, BC British Columbia

Younger physicians had more than twice the odds of being dissatisfied as compared to those counterparts who were 65 years of age and older. Family physicians in a family medicine only practice had more than one and a half times greater odds of dissatisfaction (OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.50–1.72) with their professional lives compared to their “focused” practice colleagues.

Those family physicians involved in teaching have lower odds of dissatisfaction with their professional lives (OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.65–0.75) than their colleagues who do not have a teaching practice. Additionally, family physicians using an electronic medical record (EMR) have higher odds of dissatisfaction with their professional lives (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.05–1.22) compared to those not using an EMR.

Family physicians who work 80–100 h per week had the highest odds of being dissatisfied with their professional lives (OR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.14–3.01) when compared to those working more than 120 h per week. Family physicians satisfied with their remuneration model have 75% lesser odds of reporting professional life dissatisfaction (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.24–0.27) compared to those who are dissatisfied with their remuneration model.

No significant associations were noted for gender or provision of on-call services.

Multivariate analysis – dissatisfaction with work-life balance

Table 5 summarizes the logistic regression analysis for the work-life balance dissatisfaction variable.
Table 5

Logistic regression – Dissatisfaction with work-life Balance

Variable

Adjusted Odds Ratio

95% Confidence Interval

p-value

Gender (female)

Reference

  

 Gender (male)

0.86

0.82–0.92

0.000

Age (>  65 years old)

Reference

  

 Age (< 35)

1.15

0.97–1.36

0.104

 Age (35–44)

1.90

1.66–2.18

0.000

 Age (45–54)

1.81

1.63–2.01

0.000

 Age (55–64)

1.46

1.33–1.61

0.000

Province (BC)a

Reference

  

 Province (Atlantic)

0.84

0.74–0.95

0.005

 Province (QC)

1.330

1.21–1.46

0.000

 Province (ON)

1.040

0.95–1.14

0.378

 Province (MB/SK)

1.20

1.05–1.37

0.006

 Province (AB)

1.03

0.92–1.15

0.594

Number of years licensed (> 20)

Reference

  

 Years licensed (< 4)

0.94

0.83–1.07

0.359

 Years licensed (5–9)

0.99

0.88–1.11

0.893

 Years licensed (10–14)

1.02

0.91–1.14

0.784

 Years licensed (15–19)

0.86

0.77–0.96

0.006

Practice type: focused practice

Reference

  

 Practice type: family medicine only

1.29

1.22–1.37

0.000

Teaching involvement (does not teach)

Reference

  

 Teaching involvement (teaches)

0.99

0.93–1.06

0.840

Practice population (rural/remote)

Reference

  

 Practice population (inner city)

0.82

0.74–0.91

0.000

 Practice population (urban)

0.84

0.78–0.91

0.000

 Practice population (small town)

0.94

0.85–1.03

0.200

Remuneration model (blended)

Reference

  

 Remuneration model (fee for service)

0.82

0.77–0.87

0.000

 Remuneration model (other)

0.83

0.77–0.90

0.000

Provides on-call (no)

Reference

  

 Provides on-call (yes)

1.68

1.58–1.78

0.000

EMR use (no)

Reference

  

 EMR use (yes)

1.22

1.15–1.30

0.000

Hours worked per week (> 120)

Reference

  

 Hours per week (< 20)

0.39

0.25–0.60

0.000

 Hours per week (20–40)

0.64

0.43–0.95

0.027

 Hours per week (40–60)

1.48

0.99–2.20

0.054

 Hours per week (60–80)

2.25

1.51–3.36

0.000

 Hours per week (80–100)

2.40

1.59–3.62

0.000

 Hours per week (100–120)

2.11

1.37–3.24

0.001

Remuneration model satisfaction (dissatisfied)

Reference

  

 Remuneration model satisfaction (satisfied)

0.25

0.23–0.26

0.000

Dependent variable coding: dissatisfaction = 1, satisfaction = 0

aAtlantic provinces = Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, QC Quebec, ON Ontario, MB Manitoba, SK Saskatchewan, AB Alberta, BC British Columbia

Male family physicians had lower odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance than their female counterparts (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.82–0.92) and family physicians in the 35–44 and 45–54 year-old age groups had the greatest odds of being dissatisfied with their work-life balance (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.66–2.18) when compared to their colleagues greater than 65 years of age.

With respect to clinical focus, non-focused practice family physicians had greater odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.22–1.37) when compared to their “focused” practice colleagues. Compared to their rural/remote colleagues, inner city (OR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.74–0.91), and urban family physicians (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.78–0.91) had lower odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance.

With respect to on-call coverage, family physicians who provide on-call coverage have more than 1.5 times greater odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance (OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.58–1.78) than those who do not provide on-call coverage.

Family physicians who use electronic medical records have greater odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance (OR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.15–1.30) compared to their colleagues who do not use electronic medical records.

Family physicians who are satisfied with their remuneration model have lower odds of dissatisfaction with their work-life balance (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.23–0.26) when compared to physicians who are dissatisfied with their income.

No significant associations were noted for involvement in teaching.

Missing analysis

Missing values for each variable in this study ranged from 0.8 to 9.5%. Given the relatively large missing values (greater than 5% for the majority of the independent variables studied), a separate analysis was done to evaluate the results with the missing values included.

The missing values were coded as a new category for each independent variable, and the binomial regression analysis was performed on the new independent variables (including missing values) Additional file 2. The results did yield some significant differences from the original analysis, the most important of which was that in the “missing” regression analysis, physician use of EMR was not associated with professional satisfaction. In the original (non-missing) analysis, physician use of EMR was associated with professional dissatisfaction.

Discussion

Canadian family physicians are overall satisfied with their work, and less satisfied with their work-life balance.

This study found that older physician age, geographic location, teaching involvement, urban practice population, capitated or salaried remuneration model, fewer hours worked per week and remuneration model satisfaction were associated with professional satisfaction in family physicians.

With respect to work-life balance satisfaction, this study found that male gender, older physician age, geographic location, number of years in practice, urban or inner city population, fee-for-service or capitated/salaried remuneration model, lack of on-call provision, fewer hours worked per week and remuneration model satisfaction were associated with work-life balance satisfaction in family physicians.

The above-mentioned variables are consistent with variables identified within the current existing literature on physician job satisfaction [28, 48, 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 12, 1416, 20, 30, 31, 41, 4957].

Novel findings in this study include the increased satisfaction that “focused” practice family physicians had compared to those with non-focused practices in both their professional satisfaction and work-life balance satisfaction. Additionally, the use of electronic medical records was a negative predictor of both professional and work-life balance satisfaction in the studied family physicians. We are not aware of previous reports of either of these findings in existing literature.

This study highlighted the need for future research in a number of areas. Firstly, the relationship between professional satisfaction and work-life balance should be investigated further. Previous research has focused on work-life balance as a separate determinant of professional satisfaction [1724]. However, the consequences of high and low professional versus work-life balance satisfaction on physician employment, burnout, retention and specialty selection could be important to physician access for patients across this country.

Given the increasing proportion of female family practitioners across the country, the finding that female physicians are more dissatisfied with their work-life balance than their male counterparts may have consequences for the overall family physician work force in Canada. It may mean that a change in approach to recruitment and retention efforts will be required in order to avoid future burnout. Primary care reform policies, which are being drafted across the country [58, 59] should take into account physician-specific concerns and satisfaction factors.

The finding that “focused” practice family physicians have greater professional and work-life satisfaction is novel within the current literature and merits further investigation given the increasing number of specialized family physicians in this country [36]. The heterogeneity of the “focused” practice family physician population in this study specifically warrants further research to explore what practice characteristics of family physicians who have one or more clinical areas of focus contribute to greater satisfaction. It is possible that a “focused” practice in a particular area of interest to the physician gives that physician increased satisfaction in his/her field of practice and thus increased profession and work-life balance satisfaction. For example, a physician who chooses to work in palliative care may have greater satisfaction in both her work and her work-life balance because palliative care holds a specific interest to her. It is also possible that the increased control inherent in choosing a focus of practice contributes to physician satisfaction in the same way that overall practice autonomy contributes to physician job satisfaction [1, 3, 9, 10, 56, 6063].

There is a dearth of research that compares focused practice family physicians to non-focused practice family physicians, perhaps because focused practice family physicians form a relatively new group in Canada, with a three-fold increase in focused practice family physicians from 1996 to 2011 [36]. The factors responsible for this increased satisfaction could potentially improve job and work-life balance satisfaction for all family physicians.

Electronic medical record use is increasing across Canada, and its adoption is essential for improved communication amongst physicians, patients and community health services. Recent research in this area does suggest that physician satisfaction increases with improved quality of electronic medical records [9, 6466]. The finding that the use of EMRs was associated with family physician job dissatisfaction warrants further inquiry, especially given the increasing prevalence of EMR use in Canada. Whether this dissatisfaction is related to the quality of electronic medical records, or to other factors needs to be investigated. Given our current era of computerization, further research is needed to determine the causes of the association between EMR use and family physician job dissatisfaction in order to more fully understand the potential consequences. As EMR adoption continues, evaluating EMR use as a single satisfaction variable may become less meaningful. However, our finding that EMR use is associated with dissatisfaction is important in directing future research in this area. Investigating EMR use in greater depth and confirming this association could be very helpful in addressing the potential impact of EMR use on physician burnout, recruitment and retention. More research could help us develop strategies to mitigate physician dissatisfaction by improving EMR design, and improving physician education regarding healthy EMR use in their practices.

Limitations

As this was a secondary analysis of the NPS, we were limited to the questions/variables that were present in the dataset. The self-reported nature of the data may also have introduced bias. The low response rate of 17% was mitigated by the weighting utilized in the statistical analysis, but it remains a cause for concern. Declining response rates amongst physician respondents is an ongoing problem in current survey-based research [67]. The findings in this study may not be generalizable to the greater Canadian family physician population given that over 80 % of potential respondents did not reply to the initial NPS survey. The missing data analysis changed the outcome of the association between physician job satisfaction and EMR use, which highlights the need for further research to evaluate this outcome.

Conclusion

Overall, Canadian family physicians are satisfied with their work, and less satisfied with their work-life balance. Female family physicians are less satisfied than their male counterparts with their work-life balance. Focused-practice family physicians are more satisfied with both their work and with their work-life balance than generalist family physicians. Family physicians who use electronic medical records are less satisfied with both their work and with their work-life balance than their colleagues who do not use electronic medical records.

This research confirmed a number of variables that contribute to family physician job satisfaction and work-life balance satisfaction in Canada. Further research can focus on exploring the practice characteristics of focused practice family physicians and the impact of focused practice versus comprehensive practice on family physician job satisfaction. Additionally, the usage of electronic medical records use on family physician job satisfaction is an area that requires further investigation.

Abbreviations

EMR: 

Electronic medical record

NPS: 

National physician survey

Declarations

Availability of data and materials

The study described in this paper was conducted utilizing original data collected for the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC), the Canadian Medical Association (CMA), and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada’s (RCPSC) National Physician Survey Database. The study was also supported by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, and Health Canada. The study and all of the data contained therein are the copyright protected works of the CFPC, CMA, and RCPSC and cannot be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without permission of the CFPC, CMA, RCPSC.

Authors’ contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to the concept, design and interpretation of the data for this paper. JM wrote the manuscript. AT and EW were both involved in critical revisions for important intellectual content. All authors gave final approval of the version to be published. All authors have agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval was obtained for this research project through The University of Western Ontario Research Ethics Board for Health Sciences Research Involving Human Subjects (HSREB). The review number is 13595E.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
(2)
Department of Family Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada
(3)
Schulich Interfaculty Program in Public Health, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada
(4)
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada

References

  1. Bovier PA, Perneger TV. Predictors of work satisfaction among physicians. Eur J Pub Health. 2003;13(4):299–305.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. García-Peña C, Reyes-Frausto S, Reyes-Lagunes I, Muñoz-Hernández O. Family physician job satisfaction in different medical care organization models. Fam Pract. 2000;17(4):309–13.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. McMurray JE, Williams E, Schwartz MD, et al. Physician job satisfaction: developing a model using qualitative data. J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12:711–4.View ArticlePubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Ahmadiyeh N, Cho NL, Kellogg KC, et al. Career satisfaction of women in surgery: perceptions, factors, and strategies. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(1):23–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Leigh JP, Kravitz RL, Schembri M, Samuels SJ, Mobley S. Physician career satisfaction across Specialities. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(14):1577–84.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Leigh JP, Tancredi DJ, Kravitz RL. Physician career satisfaction within specialties. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9:166.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Goetz K, Campbell SM, Steinhaeuser J, Broge B, Willms S, Szecsenyi J. Evaluation of job satisfaction of practice staff and general practitioners: an exploratory study. BMC Fam Pract. 2011;12(1):137.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Frank E, McMurray JE, Linzer M, Elon L. Career satisfaction of US women physicians. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:1417–26.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Friedberg M, Chen P, Busum K Van. Factors affecting physician professional satisfaction and their implications for patient care, Health Systems, and Health Policy; 2013. http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR439.html. Accessed 8 April 2018.
  10. Clem KJ, Promes SB, Glickman SW, et al. Factors enhancing career satisfaction among female emergency physicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51(6):723–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Levine RB, Harrison RA, Mechaber HF, Phillips C, Gallagher TH. Professional characteristics and job satisfaction among SGIM members: a comparison of part- time and full-time physician members. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(8):1218–21.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Tyssen R, Palmer KS, Solberg IB, Voltmer E, Frank E. Physicians’ perceptions of quality of care, professional autonomy, and job satisfaction in Canada, Norway, and the United States. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):516.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Cydulka RK, Korte R. Career satisfaction in emergency medicine: the ABEM longitudinal study of emergency physicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51(6):31–3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Goetz K, Musselmann B, Szecsenyi J, Joos S. The influence of workload and health behavior on job satisfaction of general practitioners. Fam Med. 2013;45(2):95–101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gothe H, Koster AD, Storz P, Nolting HD, Haussler B. Job satisfaction among doctors. Dtsch Arztebl. 2007;104(20):A1394–9.Google Scholar
  16. Deshpande SP, Demello J. An empirical investigation of factors influencing career satisfaction of primary care physicians. J Am Board Fam Med. 2010;23(6):762–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Shanafelt TD, Raymond M, Kosty M, et al. Satisfaction with work-life balance and the career and retirement plans of US oncologists. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(11):1127–35.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Albuquerque J, Deshauer D. Physician health: beyond work-life balance. Can Med Assoc J. 2014;186(13):E502–3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Shrestha D, Joyce CM. Aspects of work-life balance of Australian general practitioners: determinants and possible consequences. Aust J Prim Health. 2011;17(1):40–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Keeton K, Fenner DE, Johnson TRB, Hayward RA. Predictors of physician career satisfaction, work-life balance, and burnout. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(4):949–55.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Opoku ST, Apenteng BA. Career satisfaction and burnout among Ghanaian physicians. Int Health. 2014;6(1):54–61.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Dyrbye LN, Varkey P, Boone SL, Satele DV, Sloan JA, Shanafelt TD. Physician satisfaction and burnout at different career stages. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88(12):1358–67.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mobilos S, Chan M, Brown JB. Women in medicine: the challenge of finding balance. Can Fam Physician. 2008;54(9):1285–1286.e5.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Brown J, Fluit M, Lent B, Herbert C. Surgical culture in transition: gender matters and generation counts. Can J Surg. 2013;56(3):153–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Roos M, Watson J, Wensing M, Peters-Klimm F. Motivation for career choice and job satisfaction of GP trainees and newly qualified GPs across Europe: a seven countries cross-sectional survey. Educ Prim Care. 2014;25(4):202–10.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Carr PL, Gareis KC, Barnett RC. Characteristics and outcomes for women physicians who work reduced hours. J Women's Health (Larchmt). 2003;12(4):399–405.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Incitti F, Rourke J, Rourke LL, Kennard M. Rural women family physicians. Are they unique? Can Fam Physician. 2003;49:320–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Ham I, Verhoeven AAH, Groenier KH, Groothoff JW, De Haan J. Job satisfaction among general practitioners: a systematic literature review. Eur J Gen Pract. 2006;12(4):174–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Afonso P, Ramos MR, Saraiva S, Moreira CA, Figueira ML. Assessing the relation between career satisfaction in psychiatry with lifelong learning and scientific activity. Psychiatry Res. 2014;217(3):210–4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Grembowski D, Paschane D, Diehr P, Katon W, Martin D, Patrick DL. Managed care, physician job satisfaction, and the quality of primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(3):271–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Behmann M, Schmiemann G, Lingner H, Kühne F, Hummers-Pradier E, Schneider N. Job satisfaction among primary care physicians: results of a survey. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(11):193–200.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Girdhari R, Harris A, Falls G, Aliarzadeh B, Cavacuiti C. Family physician satisfaction with two different academic compensation schemes. Fam Med. 2013;45(9):622–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Lepnurm R, Dobson R, Backman A, Keegan D. Factors associated with career satisfaction among general practitioners in Canada. Can J Rural Med. 2007;12(4):217–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Statistics Canada. Access to a regular medical doctor, 2014. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2015001/article/14177-eng.htm. Accessed 8 May 2018.
  35. Biringer A, Carroll JC. What does the feminization of family medicine mean? CMAJ. 2012;184(15):1752.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Pong RW. Post-M.D. Training in Fam Med in Canada: Contin Chang over a 15 Year Period.; 2012. https://caper.ca/~assets/pdf_PostMD_Training_FamilyMedicine_Report%20_Apr-2012.pdf. Accessed 8 April 2018.
  37. Lakbala P, Dindarloo K. Physicians’ perception and attitude toward electronic medical record. Springerplus. 2014;3(1):63.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Price M, Singer A, Kim J. Adopting electronic medical records: are they just electronic paper records? Can Fam Physician. 2013;59(7)Google Scholar
  39. Kelley ML, Kuluski K, Brownlee K, Snow S. Physician satisfaction and practice intentions in northwestern Ontario. Can J Rural Med. 2008;13(3):129–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. The National Physician Survey. National Physician Survey (NPS) : 2013 Complete Methodology; 2013 http://nationalphysiciansurvey.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/NPS-2013-Complete-Methodology_V1.pdf. Accessed 8 April 2018.
  41. Duffy RD, Richard GV. Physician job satisfaction across six major specialties. J Vocat Behav. 2006;68(3):548–59.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Williams ES, Konrad TR, Linzer M, et al. Physician, practice, and patient characteristics related to primary care physician physical and mental health: results from the physician Worklife study. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(1):121–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Shugerman R, Linzer M, Nelson K, Douglas J, Williams R, Konrad R. Pediatric generalists and subspecialists: determinants of career satisfaction. Pediatrics. 2001;108(3):E40.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Cooke GPE, Doust JA. Steele MC. A survey of resilience, burnout, and tolerance of uncertainty in Australian general practice registrars. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):2.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Karsh BT, Beasley JW, Brown RL. Employed family physician satisfaction and commitment to their practice, work group, and health care organization. Health Serv Res. 2010;45(2):457–75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Walker KA, Pirotta M. What keeps Melbourne GPs satisfied in their jobs? Aust Fam Physician. 2007;36(10):877–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. McGrail MR, Humphreys JS, Scott A, Joyce CM, Kalb G. Professional satisfaction in general practice: does it vary by size of community? Med J Aust. 2010;193(2):94–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Tanne JH. Income and job satisfaction fall among US doctors. BMJ. 2012;344(May):e3109–9.Google Scholar
  49. Whalley D, Gravelle H, Sibbald B. Effect of the new contract on GPs’ working lives and perceptions of quality of care: a longitudinal survey. Br J Gen Pract. 2008;58(546):8–14.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Ulmer B, Harris M. Australian GPs are satisfied with their job: even more so in rural areas. Fam Pract. 2002;19(3):300–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Kilmartin MR, Newell CJ, Line MA. The balancing act: key issues in the lives of women general practitioners in Australia.[see comment]. Med J Aust. 2002;177(2):87–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Chen PG, Curry LA, Nunez-Smith M, Bradley EH, Desai MM. Career satisfaction in primary care: a comparison of international and US medical graduates. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(2):147–52.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Lindfors PM, Meretoja OA, Töyry SM, Luukkonen RA, Elovainio MJ, Leino TJ. Job satisfaction, work ability and life satisfaction among Finnish anaesthesiologists. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007;51(7):815–22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Carleton CJ, Clain SH. Women, men, and job satisfaction. East Econ J. 2011;38(3):331–55.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  55. Finset KB, Gude T, Hem E, Tyssen R, Ekeberg O, Vaglum P. Which young physicians are satisfied with their work? A prospective nationwide study in Norway. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5(1):19.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Stoddard JJ, Hargraves JL, Reed M, Vratil A. Managed care, professional autonomy, and income: effects on physician career satisfaction. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(10):675–84.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Cheng B, Kan M, Levanon G, Ray RL. Job satisfaction: progress at a Snail’s pace. 2014. https://www.conference-board.org/publications/publicationdetail.cfm?publicationid=2785. Accessed 8 April 2018.
  58. Wong ST, Chau LW, Hogg W, et al. An international cross-sectional survey on the quality and costs of primary care (QUALICO-PC): recruitment and data collection of places delivering primary care across Canada. BMC Fam Pract. 2015;16(1):20.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Rudoler D, Laporte A, Barnsley J, Glazier RH, Deber RB. Paying for primary care: a cross-sectional analysis of cost and morbidity distributions across primary care payment models in Ontario Canada. Soc Sci Med. 2015;124:18–28.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Arvey RD, Bouchard TJ, Segal NL, Abraham LM. Job satisfaction: environmental and genetic components. J Appl Psychol. 1989;74(2):187–92.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  61. Halpern G. Relative contributions of motivator and hygiene factors to overall job satisfaction. J Appl Psychol. 1966;50(3):198–200.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Katerndahl D, Parchman M, Wood R. Perceived complexity of care, perceived autonomy, and career satisfaction among primary care physicians. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(1):24–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Cohrs JC, Abele AE, Dette DE. Integrating situational and dispositional determinants of job satisfaction: findings from three samples of professionals. Aust J Psychol. 2006;140(4):363–96.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  64. Jones CD, Holmes GM, Lewis SE, Thompson KW, Cykert S, DeWalt DA. Satisfaction with electronic health records is associated with job satisfaction among primary care physicians. Inform Prim Care. 2013;21(1):18–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. De Lusignan S, Pearce C, Munro N. Getting on with your computer is associated with job satisfaction in primary care: Entrants to primary care should be assessed for their competency with electronic patient record systems. Inform Prim Care. 2013;21(1):i-iii.Google Scholar
  66. Elder KT, Wiltshire JC, Rooks RN, Belue R, Gary LC. Health information technology and physician career satisfaction. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2010;7Google Scholar
  67. Wiebe ER, Kaczorowski J, MacKay J. Why are response rates in clinician surveys declining? Can Fam Physician. 2012;58(4):e225–8.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2018

Advertisement