Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40382546›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2025

Team climate, job satisfaction, burnout and practice performance: results of a national survey of staff in general practices in England.

Peter Williams, Heather Gage, Bridget Jones, Carole Aspden, Jessica Smylie, Thomas Bird, Morro M L Touray, Phelim Brady, John Campbell, Rupa Chilvers and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Peter WilliamsDepartment of Mathematics, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK.
Heather GageSurrey Health Economics Centre (SHEC), Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7WG, UK.
Bridget JonesSurrey Health Economics Centre (SHEC), Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7WG, UK. b.e.jones@surrey.ac.uk.
Carole AspdenRoyal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Jessica SmylieRoyal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Thomas BirdRoyal Surrey County Hospital Foundation Trust, Guildford, GU2 7XX, UK.
Morro M L TouraySurrey Health Economics Centre (SHEC), Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7WG, UK.
Phelim BradyChair of GP Teams Project Service Users Panel, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
John CampbellUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Rupa ChilversTangerine Bee, Exeter, UK.
Catherine MarchandCentre for Health Services Studies (CHSS), University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NZ, UK.
Stephen PeckhamCentre for Health Services Studies (CHSS), University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NZ, UK.
Suzanne H RichardsFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Karen SpilsburyFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Mark JoyRoyal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Simon de LusignanRoyal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.

Funding

NIHR National Institute for Health Research Health Services & Delivery Research Programme 17/08/34
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeasures are needed to address recruitment and retention problems in general practice in England. A good team climate, the relational processes of team working, can mitigate pressured work environments, but little is known about it.

objectivesTo explore factors associated with more favourable team climates in general practices and investigate associations between team climate and outcomes for staff and practice performance.

methodsAll 6475 general practices in England were eligible to take part in an online cross-sectional survey. Clinical and non-clinical staff in practices were invited to participate. Data were gathered using the 14 item version of the Team Climate Inventory; analysis was conducted on 10 items because piloting indicated many participants could not answer four items about practice objectives. Secondary outcomes included single item measures of job satisfaction, intention to remain working in the practice and burnout. Practice performance measures were: attainment in the Quality and Outcomes pay-for-performance system (for clinical effectiveness) and patient experience ratings from the national General Practice Patient Survey. Staff outcomes were analysed, principally by role. Practices in which over 50% of staff participated were included in modelling of practice level outcomes.

resultsA total of 9835 individual members of staff from 809 practices participated. Most indicated a favourable team climate in their practice, (mean 3.77, on scale 1-5 best, SD 0.84); 61.3% stated they were mostly or extremely satisfied in their jobs; 26.1% met the criteria for high burnout. General Practitioners, compared to other clinical and non-clinical staff, perceived team climate to be better, and reported less likelihood of leaving, yet lower job satisfaction and higher burnout. In practice-level modelling, team climate improved as practice size decreased. Staff outcomes (job satisfaction, likelihood of remaining in post, less burnout) were associated with a better practice team climate, as were patient experience ratings. Higher GP to patient ratios were associated with improved job satisfaction, less burnout and more favourable patient experience ratings.

conclusionsPolicies focussed on improving team climate could improve staff outcomes and contribute to mitigating the workforce crisis in general practice in England. Guidance on fostering good team climates is needed for practices.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalGeneral PracticeJob SatisfactionOrganizational CulturePatient Care TeamAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesBurnoutGeneral practiceHealth policyHealth servicesHealth workforceJob satisfactionPrimary careSurvey

Identifiers

PMID40382546
PMCPMC12085022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.