Showing posts with label professionalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label professionalism. Show all posts

Saturday, January 3, 2026

Enthusiasm Is A Plus...

 



 

I am currently writing an opinion piece on the medical skills necessary for current and future psychiatrists.  I designed a table and sent it to my favorite internist for feedback – my brother.  He was concerned about my level of intensity and wrote back:

“In an ideal world this sounds good. In my experience most psychiatrists do not have your zest for medical knowledge. Enthusiasm is hard to teach.”

His response got me thinking about the enthusiasm factor in academics and medicine.  Is it teachable or can it be transmitted some other way?  What about the issue of authenticity?  Is the observable really enthusiasm or is it something else appearing to be enthusiasm?  Competitiveness is probably a good example and it is legendary in pre-med and medical school courses.  There appear to be plenty of people who adhere to the old adage about escaping a bear attack: “I don’t have to be faster than the bear – I only have to be faster than you.”  When I was in med school these people were known as gunners because on rounds with attendings they were gunning for you.  They would attempt to elevate their status by trying to make you look bad. In some cases that took on the appearance of just trying to look more interested than you.  I never really understood the mentality because after all we were in the presence of an attending who could make all of us look bad – and typically did.

My interaction with professors and attendings was the first real sign that true enthusiasm exists.  In college at every level there were professors with vast knowledge of their subject material.  At times they would interject their personal excitement about the subject matter into the lectures.  Anecdotes about the organic chemist who famously said that God consults him about molecules, the inscription on Boltzmann’s grave, or the mathematician who discovered group theory and then died in a duel at age 20 and the implications. Some of these professors would read the room and try to inject humor to invigorate the class and create some enthusiasm. And there were the obvious sacrifices like hanging in there as a professor or adjunct at a liberal arts college for substandard pay and benefits for the love of the academic field and the ability to practice it.

In medical school, it was even more obvious.  Most of the people med students interact with are attending physicians on clinical rotations who teach but also have their own productivity demands.  Physicians rounding on patients with a teaching team have their clinics or surgeries in addition to supervising trainees. They need an academic level of expertise in their field to maintain the teacher-student hierarchy.  A pediatric endocrinologist told me: “I must know the most about any endocrine subject in the room (referring to the mix of specialties on our ward team).  It is no accident that I know all about adrenal steroidogenesis.  I have to know it cold.”

Was that still about competitiveness and one-upmanship?  Possibly but highly unlikely.  After all an attending physician is not competing against trainees or anyone else.  If there is any competitiveness it comes down to internal standards.  As an attending for me that came down to a series of questions:

1.  Am I missing anything?

2.  Am I doing an adequate job?

3.  Am I covering everything that is important to cover and am I communicating what that is?

4.  Are there any problems with the staff or trainees that need to be addressed?

Competitiveness does persist post training and it is a largely undiscussed problem.  I once witnessed a confrontation between two very high-level academics where one commented that he would never be beaten by the other.  The rejoinder was: “I think the field is big enough for both of us”.   In the current American system, it is encouraged among front line physicians using several metrics like productivity (number of patients seen not papers read) and various scapegoating techniques in the corporate employee assessment. But I think most senior physicians get to the point where they welcome collegial discussion and consultation.  If you discussed it with them – their competition is most likely against high internal standards – some of which may be unrealistically high.

The psychology of enthusiasm has several dimensions. There are behavioral approaches to improve it – not the least of which is establishing predictable routines.  Athletes routinely push past nonspecific feelings of unwellness and notice that those feelings resolve and they feel much better with their workout routine.  This helps establish a long-term pattern of enthusiasm for high levels of exercise.  There is a social component that is used in sports for both the athletes and spectators involved.  Like all psychological phenomena there are rating scales that seek to describe the enthusiasm of teachers and work engagement in general (1).  In the age of burnout several studies have suggested that enthusiasm may minimize that problem.  It would be difficult to maintain enthusiasm in the face of moral injury.

From a psychodynamic perspective, identification with teachers, professors, and attendings is a largely unspoken but in my experience powerful process. In clinical medicine there is probably no better field to observe personal attributes of teachers and consciously or unconsciously incorporate them into your personality.  I was fortunate enough to work with so many enthusiastic and high energy physicians and teams and they had a direct impact on me.  The message was be compulsive, check and recheck everything, and do the research on the fly.  I have written about the last team I worked on in medical school.  Every person on that team from the intern to the 70-year-old nephrologist was interested in kidney disease 24/7 and we covered the largest inpatient unit I have ever seen (including transplant patients) and two outpatient clinics.  We worked at it from sun up to sun down and everybody was energetic and ready to work.  That team also showed me the importance of a sense of humor.  Everybody had it but one of the Internal medicine residents was practically a stand-up comedian.  On my last day of medical school, I worked until 10 PM with that team.  They were swamped with consults and asked me to do three after the clinic.  I was happy to do it and then skipped across the golf course like county grounds to my apartment a half mile away.  Even as an old man – I feel happy every time I think about that experience. 

As I am winding down this post, there is a moral dimension to enthusiasm at least as far as medicine goes.  People have been described as doing harmful things enthusiastically.  Enthusiasm has to be a positive force.  One of the derivations from the Greek is “possessed by God or divinely inspired”.  At times in history, it has been equated with madness.  Philosophers have written about it as both a positive (promoting desirable values and politics) and a negative (zeal overtaking rationality).  In the context I am discussing – it takes the form of improved focus on difficult to solve patient problems and espirit de corps.    

Identification only gets you so far – I don’t think anybody has ever mistaken me for a comedian.       

What about in the case I started this post with?  It was my brother responding to a compulsive table about what medical problems psychiatrists should be able to recognize, diagnose, and either treat or triage. Enthusiasm may be a part of that and I will admit to being very enthusiastic about medicine and neurology in general, but there is more going on.  I made most of the diagnoses in the table not just based on enthusiasm but at least three other factors.  First, I practiced across multiple settings and was often the only psychiatrist around.  When you are asked to see people in general hospitals, nursing homes, and outpatient clinics in the same week there is a good chance that you will encounter serious but vaguely characterized problems in all these settings.   That could range from agitation due to any number of underlying neurological conditions to a mother who wants her 3-year-old son put on stimulants because of uncontrollable behavior.  Second, neurologists are in shorter supply than psychiatrists.  That doesn’t mean that psychiatrists should practice neurology but it does mean that specialists who are trained in and expected to know neurology might do a better job with certain problems than primary care physicians. At the top of that list are recognizing aphasia syndromes, presentations of acute encephalitis and meningitis, movement disorders, and functional neurological disorders.  Third, there is always a group of psychiatric patients who see their psychiatrist as the primary care physician they prefer to follow up with.  I have been able to diagnose unrecognized illnesses just based on that difference in preference and communication.  Psychiatric liaison with primary care is a useful function.     

Heading into 2026, I hope that all the professionals reading this have been exposed to the levels of enthusiasm that I have during their career.  And I hope that the doctors I end up seeing in the future all have it.

 

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA

 

Some additional thoughts/anecdotes:

1:  One of the advantages of enthusiasm is embracing just how much you need to know in order to do a good job.  A long time friend of mine who ended up being an ophthalmologist showed me his standard 3 volume ophthalmology text and put it this way:  "Every specialty is covered in 2-3,000 pages.  It is what you need to know."  That always made sense to me but as a specialist - enthusiasm changes that task from last minute cramming to knowledge that is part of your personal identity.  It is knowledge that has to stay with you and you have to keep it current.  It can mean the difference between life and death.    

2:  When I was a PGY-2, I was staffing patients in a clinic with my attending who was a brilliant psychiatrist and researcher.   He was very enthusiastic about teaching.  He asked me this question that also turned out to be a thought experiment:  "Suppose you are done with all of the training and you are out at a cocktail party somewhere.  People come up to you and start talking. Do you think you will be talking with them like a psychiatrist or like somebody who has had no training?  That question seems very easy to answer at this point in time, but back in 1984 I was drawing a blank.  This blog is probably a good example of what that answer is.

3:  Obsessional behavior can be mistaken for enthusiasm.  Ar various points in my career I have seen physicians paralyzed by it and stuck in a loop of unproductive activity.  It has happened to me a few times.  If that behavior is related to patient care - there is aways someone in your field who can tell you if you are missing something or not.   If it is a case of administrative scapegoating - you can always move on though it may not be easy.

4:  The anecdote about how my nephrology team convinced me to work late the night before my graduation is humorous, but probably not in a way that I can convey in writing.  At about 5PM that night the senior medicine residents approached me with the idea of staffing 3 more consults. It went something like this: "Look George - we know you graduate tomorrow and probably want to get out of here but we are getting killed with consults.  Do you think you could help us out by doing three?  One last thing?"

To clarify - in teaching hospitals, medical students are not physicians.  As part of the learning process on a consult service, they see the patient, get the necessary historical, physical exam, and laboratory data and record everything in the chart.   Then they present it to the attending physician.  The attending shows interviews the patient, does the indicated physical examination, adds the additional insights of an expert for both the consult team and the patient, and adds to the note and countersigns it.  The medical student and residents need to come up with their own diagnoses and treatment plan for discussion purposes - but that is the ultimate responsibility of the attending. There is a progression in medical training that the initial work by the medical student or resident becomes either a much closer approximation or identical to what the attending would say as people progress from med student -> resident -> fellow -> attending.

The residents were trying to cajole me into doing the work but they did not need to.  When I said I would they increased the flattery to absurd levels and we all had a good laugh about it.    

5:  On the issue of competitiveness - I had no idea how bad it could be until I had graduated from college.  I attended a very small college and we did not have a specific pre-med track.  I was a chemistry and biology double major.  Long before I decided to go to medical school - I heard anecdotes about sabotage in the organic chemistry lab to either contaminate the products or reduce the yield of synthetic reactions.  As a former lab assistant that is probably not the best way to evaluate lab performance.  Organic chemistry was one of the feared med school pre-requisites.  There is even palpable bitterness about the course in some people who are practicing physicians. Sabotaging somebody else's lab results seems counterproductive in so many ways and it is difficult for me to see how that would work very well.  As a lab assistant I viewed my job as making sure everyone was safe (I did prevent 2 explosions) and knew what they were doing.     

6:  “Are you aggressive enough to be a physician?”  I was seated across the desk from the Head of Cardiology.  He was a stocky middle-aged man with a flushed appearance.  He looked younger than he probably was and had a full head of hair that was cut short, parted, and neatly oiled like he just left a barber shop.  The year was 1981 and it was my first interview to get into medical school.

“I am not sure what you mean…”  I stammered.

“Well tell me what you have been doing with your life since you graduated from college.”

I decided my joke about cramming 4 years of living into 8 would not go over well so I recited the details.  Peace Corps, teaching chemistry, and botanical research cloning Douglas Fir and Loblolly Pine.  Those were the high points and all the details took about 20 minutes.

When I was done his response surprised me: “Anybody who can go into the African bush and teach chemistry is aggressive enough for me!”  I did not say anything about the bush – I lived on a high plateau next to Mt. Kenya.  The only bushes around were coffee.  But he delivered the line like a football coach and it seemed like an endorsement when you played well.

All these years later – I think he was getting at enthusiasm.  And over the course of my career – I have seen this substitution by many physicians.    


References:

1:  Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Utrecht work engagement scale: Preliminary manual. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University, Utrecht. 2003 Nov;26(1):64-100.

 

Graphic Credit: 

Teaching hospitals of the Medical College of Wisconsin taken from the path walking from my apartment on 89th street.  The black and white photo is Milwaukee County Hospital shot in 1982.  The color photo is from the same spot in December 2025.  The two most visible buildings are the Froedert and MCW Center for Advanced Care (left) and the Froedert & MCW Clinical Cancer Center.  The Froedert legacy spread from the original Froedert Hospital that was there is 1982 - where I did 2 neurosurgery, a nephrology, and a neurology rotation.  B&W is shot with a Konica 35 mm and Ektachrome.  Color is an iPhone 15.


Sunday, September 3, 2023

Happy Labor Day 2023!

 



Over the years of writing this blog I have put out a Labor Day message to describe any progress in the physician workspace in the past year.  The practice environment for physicians has deteriorated significantly over the past 3 decades and those changes are generally locked in by the healthcare business managers backed by both Congress and state governments. I have used the following graphic several times on this blog to illustrate what happened over specific time frames and it is probably time to add some additional details.



The impact of managed care on medical practice has been clear for the past 30 years.  In many cases that model is being adopted by physicians in private practice settings. For example, it is common now to see a specialist initially but in follow up see one of the physician extenders working with them. That can make health care a lot less personal and it leads me to think about the reason why physicians are trained to provide continuity of care in the first place.

But even more than that issue is the explosion of online services provided for flat rates that focus on seemingly basic problems in exchange for payment. On my streaming services that typically involves a company that offers prescriptions for depression, anxiety, hair loss, and erectile dysfunction.  A second company offers beta blockers for performance anxiety.  Given the side effect potential for these medications – I am curious about how comprehensive the initial evaluations are and the follow up visits.

I was recently hospitalized and had a first hand look at what the modern hospital workplace looks like.  When I was in training there were discrete teams by specialty and they consisted of physicians at all levels of training.  A typical team might have 1-2 med students, 1-2 interns, a resident, a senior resident or fellow, and the attending. The work load would depend on whether your service admitted people to the hospital (typically internal medicine, surgery, neurology, renal medicine, cardiology, psychiatry) or consulted to those teams (infectious disease, endocrinology, pulmonology, rheumatology, cardiology, psychiatry).  The admitting services were the most intense because of irregular admissions and complicated unstable patients. Teams generally had places to meet, where patients were presented to the attending and there were formal didactics. Bedside teaching occurred on rounds.

During my hospitalization, I was not seen by a single physician in my room. When I went out into the hallway, both sides of the hall were lined by people facing computer screens. There was one consulting team standing outside a patient door – visible only because it was obvious the fellow and attending were discussing cases. The level of crowding was striking and it left me with the impression that all these people could not possibly be physicians.  Managed care shaped the form of these teams and who was in that hallway. First, they eliminated the usual admitting services and replaced them all with hospitalists. Then they replaced at least some physicians on those teams with non-physicians. Those moves benefit business decisions but I have not seen a single adequate study on the impact it has on medical care.

Training physicians in hospitals has typically involved hands on learning, consultation from senior and expert physicians, and active learning environment, and in many cases the opportunity for research.  All these areas need to be preserved in the practice environment in order to stimulate practicing physicians to maintain high standards. An environment that leads to burnout, sleep deprivation, and moral injury is not adequate to the task. The question always has been whether physicians have any kind of leverage that could lead to appropriate modifications. That question has never been put to the test and in fact, healthcare organizations in the United States generally flaunt their power over physicians rather than attempting to negotiate with them.

Will a union make a difference? My experience with unions started out in my family of origin.  My father was a member of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Engineers (BLFE). He worked as a locomotive fireman and then an engineer.  He had to be a union member in order to work.  He generally was not very happy about it. The railroad industry was run on a seniority system and as railroad utilization decreased – younger workers like my father had a difficult time finding job assignments. Even though they were technically employed by a railroad and reimbursement for the work was good, it seemed like only the most senior engineers benefitted to the point that they could make a good living.  As a result, the contracts negotiated by the unions did not mean that much to my father. He also tended to see the union as corrupt because, the union officials clearly made far more than he was making trying to work in their system.  Railroads unions were also compartmentalized - so a strike against one railroad did not mean a strike against all.  As a result, workers from the railroad that was the object of the strike could work for competing railroads during the strike. If similar rules apply to physicians a uniform practice environment is no guarantee, but the onerous aspects might be eliminated.   

Unions for physicians and residents are becoming increasingly popular but they have more restrictions that in a blue-collar environment. The National Labor relations Board (NLRB) enforces the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and decides what public sector employees can form unions (1). Independent contractors, supervisors, and managers are excluded because the focus of the act was on laborers. The general categories are loosely defined so it takes an NLRB investigation to determine who can be in the union. Tenure and tenure track employees were eliminated by a Supreme Court ruling. Only salaried employees who do not do a significant amount of supervision are allowed to be union members. If a union is allowed, the goals in terms of collective bargaining, representation, and impact on hospital policies need to be determined.  Although the momentum for unions is building, there is a considerable amount of inertia from the managed care era. During that time, we had many physicians who were eager to escape a deteriorating practice environment to become administrators and basically enforce business policies. It remains to be seen if unions can have a favorable impact on local health care policy and practices – but just establishing more is a step in the right direction.    

More resistance to Maintenance of Certification by various boards and the American Board of Medical Specialties is also growing. I went to the alternate system National Board of Physicians and Surgeons (NBPAS) certification in 2018 and have not looked back. At the same time, I realize that I was outside of any system demanding that I recertify through an ABMS board and as a result – in a unique situation relative to younger colleagues. A petition was started in July to end ABMS MOC and so far there are 20,000 + signatures. There was an initiative in the APA to stop MOC about 10 years ago, but the administrative process prevented it from being put on a ballot. The basic problems with MOC is that there is no evidence it is necessary for quality care, in fact most health care organizations have abandoned true quality programs. Second, it is not reflective of clinical practice. Most physicians – even generalists end up in a niche and focus their educational efforts and mastery in that area. It makes no sense to keep taking examinations outside of that area. Third, it is a substantial time and financial commitment and it clearly generates a lot of revenue for ABMS specialty boards. Fourth, there is some suggestion that MOC should be tied to state licensing (Maintenance of Licensure or MOL). This would allow states and health care organizations even more power in controlling physicians – even during their private times when they would need to spend time studying for barely relevant examinations. Elimination of MOC is another positive step in the direction of restoring a more reasonable practice environment.

Beyond a better practice environment and what it takes to make that politically – the profession of medicine is at stake.  I have written about a lot of the technicalities – but this is deeply personal. Going to medical school and studying medicine was the best thing I could have done with my life. By identifying with the practicing physicians in my various training programs I learned how to live and breathe medicine and psychiatry 24 hours a day. Always thinking about it, never far from a journal article that I wanted to read, and always focused on how that translated to clinical practice – usually a very hard problem I was seeing in practice. From the very first patient contact, the importance of communicating with people in an empathic, unhurried and comprehensive way was obvious.  We cannot afford to lose that transformative effect that medicine has on people.  We cannot dumb things down for the business world and make human biology less complex. I know there are many docs out there that think like me.  Whether we can unionize or cancel MOC – we can never lose sight of the fact that we need to preserve a transformative profession for the sake of future generations of physicians and their patients.

 

 

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA

 

References:

1:  Bowling D 3rd, Richman BD, Schulman KA. The Rise and Potential of Physician Unions. JAMA. 2022 Aug 16;328(7):617-618. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.12835. PMID: 35900755.