{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022954924874791317, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0070951585976627716, 'mean_word_length': 5.567123287671233, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Novel Instrument for Integrated Measurement and Assessment of Intrinsic Motivation, Team Climate, and Burnout in Multidisciplinary Teams.

INTRODUCTION
There is increasing recognition of the importance of intrinsic motivation, team dynamics, and burnout in multidisciplinary teams striving to achieve the Quadruple Aim.


OBJECTIVE
To assess self-rated team climate, intrinsic motivation, and burnout of a multidisciplinary team at an urgent primary care center and to explore potential relationships between the concepts.


METHODS
A scoping review of the English-language literature was conducted to identify any validated team climate, intrinsic motivation, and burnout measurement tools. The Team Climate Inventory Short Form and a single-item measure of burnout were chosen because of their validity, appropriateness to the study setting, and practicality. Daniel Pink's concept of motivation was operationalized into a novel, 13-question survey tool. The face validity of the motivation questions was assessed by various clinicians. The online survey was administered to a 38-member multidisciplinary team working at an urgent primary care center in Vancouver, Canada. Scores for team climate, motivation, and burnout were assessed, along with the tool's internal consistency.


RESULTS
The survey findings (33 responses) indicate a relatively high-performing multidisciplinary team, with high scores in all categories related to team climate and intrinsic motivation. Only 8% of 25 respondents met the threshold level of burnout, with no respondents indicating severe or complete burnout. Reliability analysis produced α coefficients of 0.956 and 0.945 for team climate and intrinsic motivation, respectively, indicating satisfactory reliability.


DISCUSSION
The burnout ratings align with the scores for team climate and intrinsic motivation. The study findings suggest that the clinic's current approach to leadership and management has been effective in promoting a healthy team and work environment. The small sample size does not permit statistical inferences without further testing and validation. Further exploration is warranted of various structural, organizational, system-level, and environmental factors that affect the survey's results.


CONCLUSION
The study fills a gap in the health services research literature pertaining to the performance of multidisciplinary teams.