Introduction. The medical literature suggests disturbingly high rates of burnout among US physicians. The objective of this study was to determine the rates of burnout, other forms of distress, and overall quality of life among physicians in Sedgwick County.Methods. x The study involved a convenience sample of 197 physicians who were active member physicians of the Medical Society of Sedgwick County (MSSC). Between July and August 2018, we surveyed 872 physicians who were active members of the MSSC. The survey assessed manifestations of burnout, symptoms of depression and suicidal ideation, fatigue, and quality of life. The authors used standard descriptive summary statistics, Mann-Whitney U test/independent samples t-Test, Fisher's exact test, and correlations to analyze the data.Results. The participation rate was 44.6%, with 49.5% of the respondents reporting manifestations of burnout. Although 85% of the participants rated their overall quality of life as good/very good, 45% screened positive for depression, 5% had thoughts of suicide during the past year, and 44% reported excessive fatigue during the past week. Those with manifestations of burnout were 2.13 (100% vs 46.9%, p < 0.01) times more likely to report thoughts of suicidal ideation, 2.43 (72.6% vs 30.4%; p < 0.001) times more likely to screen positive for depression, and 1.89 (67.5% vs 35.8%; p < 0.001) times more likely to have high degrees of fatigue. All of the participants who had suicidal ideation reported manifestations of burnout. Conclusions.Burnout was prevalent among active member physicians of the MSSC. Burnout among the participants was associated with symptoms of depression, fatigue, suicidal ideation, and intention of leaving the medical profession via early retirement and/or career change. Kans J Med 2019;12(2):33-39.

Introduction: Given the recent reports of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) and harm of e-cigarettes, the authors evaluated changes in the perception of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation tools in 2019 relative to 2016. The authors also evaluated the sources family physicians most commonly use to receive information regarding e-cigarettes. Methods: Authors conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 248 community family physicians in Kansas from October to December 2019. The authors used a 11-item questionnaire to measure the participants’ perceptions of recommending e-cigarettes to patients for tobacco cessation. The authors used a mixed method approach to collect, analyze, and interpret the data. Standard descriptive statistics, Likelihood-Ratio/Fisher’s exact tests, and immersion-crystallization approached were used to analyze the data. Results: The response rate was 59.3% (147/248). Proportion of the family physicians who did not recommend e-cigarettes for smoking cessation was significantly higher in 2019 than in 2016 (86% vs 82%; χ2 [1, n = 261] = 12.31; P < .01). Several reasons regarding respondents’ perception of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation tools were reported. The medical literature and news media were the top sources where family physicians accessed e-cigarettes information. Conclusion: Our study has suggested that the majority of family physicians in our data do not currently recommend e-cigarettes for tobacco cessation. Opinions regarding the efficacy and safety of e-cigarettes are influenced by information source. Future, larger studies would be beneficial to further determine physicians’ beliefs and practices regarding e-cigarettes as smoking cessation products.