ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased difficulties in emotional well-being among healthcare workers. The current investigation assesses how changes in depression and anxiety symptoms fluctuate relative to resilience across three time points: baseline, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up among a cohort of physicians and nurses (n = 728).MethodsGeneralized linear mixed modeling for repeated-measures was used to assess the association between resilience and mental health symptoms using validated measures for all variables.ResultsThe odds of probable anxiety were reduced by 81% for each one-unit increase in resilience (odds ratio = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [0.14, 0.26]). The odds of probable depression were reduced by 88% for each one-unit increase in BRS (odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [0.07, 0.2]).ConclusionsResults highlight the importance of developing and implementing interventions that foster resilience among healthcare workers.

Purpose Medical training institutions worldwide must be prepared to remediate struggling learners, but there is little empirical evidence around learners' perspectives on remediation efforts. Research shows that emotion has a significant effect on learning, but it has not been well studied in remediation in medical education. Given the high stakes of remediation, understanding more about learners' emotional experience could lead to improvements in remediation programs. This study aimed to explore medical students' emotional experience of failure and remediation to offer opportunities to improve remediation. Method This study is a thematic analysis of data collected from July to September 2022 from one-to-one interviews with students from 4 institutions (2 in the United States and 2 in the Netherlands) who had not met expectations on 1 or more medical school assessment(s). Interview questions explored students’ experiences with learning of and responding to a performance that was below expected standards, with probes around any mentions of emotions. Results Fourteen students participated: 9 from schools in the United States and 5 from schools in the Netherlands. The students perceived the failure and remediation event to be highly significant, reflecting negatively on their suitability for a career as a physician. We identified 5 themes: (1) shame was pervasive and only retrospectively perceived as unwarranted; (2) self-doubt was common and weighty; (3) resentment, blame, and other external-facing emotions were present but softened over time; (4) worry and stress related to perceived career effect differed across countries; and (5) students had mixed emotional reactions to the remediation process. Conclusions Medical students have strong emotional responses to failure and remediation. Expecting and considering emotions such as shame, self-doubt, and anger could help educators design better remediation programs. Differences across countries may be at least partially explained by different degrees of time variability and flexibility within the curricula.

OBJECTIVE:The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased difficulties in emotional well-being among healthcare workers. The current investigation assesses how changes in depression and anxiety symptoms fluctuate relative to resilience across three time points: baseline, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up among a cohort of physicians and nurses ( n = 728). METHODS:Generalized linear mixed modeling for repeated-measures was used to assess the association between resilience and mental health symptoms using validated measures for all variables. RESULTS:The odds of probable anxiety were reduced by 81% for each one-unit increase in resilience (odds ratio = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [0.14, 0.26]). The odds of probable depression were reduced by 88% for each one-unit increase in BRS (odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [0.07, 0.2]). CONCLUSIONS:Results highlight the importance of developing and implementing interventions that foster resilience among healthcare workers.

PURPOSE:This study aimed to develop an instrument to measure medical trainees' perceptions of justice in clinical learning environments. METHOD:Between 2019 and 2023, the authors conducted a multiyear, multi-institutional, multiphase study to develop a 16-item justice measure with 4 dimensions: interpersonal, informational, procedural, and distributive. The authors gathered validity evidence based on test content, internal structure, and relationships with other variables across 3 phases. Phase 1 involved drafting items and gathering evidence that items measured intended dimensions. Phase 2 involved analyzing relevance of items for target groups, examining interitem correlations and factor loadings in a preliminary analysis, and obtaining reliability estimates. Phase 3 involved a confirmatory factor analysis and collecting convergent and discriminant validity evidence. RESULTS:In phase 1, 63 of 91 draft items were retained following a content validation exercise gauging how well items measured targeted dimensions (mean [SD] item ratings within dimensions, 4.16 [0.36] to 4.39 [0.34]) on a 5-point Likert scale (with 1 indicating not at all well and 5 indicating extremely well). In phase 2, 30 items were removed due to low factor loadings (i.e., < 0.40), and 4 items per dimension were selected (factor loadings, 0.42-0.89). In phase 3, a confirmatory factor analysis supported the 4-dimensional model ( χ2 = 610.14, P < .001; comparative fit index = 0.90, Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.87, root mean squared error of approximation = 0.11, standardized root mean squared residual = 0.06), with convergent and discriminant validity evidence showing hypothesized positive correlations with a justice measure ( r = 0.93, P < .001), trait positive affect ( r = 0.46, P < .001), and emotional stability ( r = 0.33, P < .001) and negative correlations with trait negative affect ( r = -0.39, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Results indicate the measure's potential utility in understanding justice perceptions and designing targeted interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has subjected healthcare workers to enormous stress. Measuring the impact of this public health emergency is essential to developing strategies that can effectively promote resilience and wellness. The Epidemic-Pandemic Impacts Inventory Supplemental Healthcare Module-Brief Version (EPII-SHMb) was developed to measure impacts among occupational cohorts serving on the front lines of healthcare. While this instrument has been utilized in COVID-19 related studies, little is known about its psychometric properties. This study collects evidence for validity of the EPII-SHMb by evaluating its internal structure and how its scores associate with other variables. Physicians and nursing staff across a large New York health system were cross-sectionally surveyed using an online questionnaire between June and November 2020. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a 3-factor solution, identifying factors Lack of Workplace Safety (7 items), Death/Dying of Patients (3 items), and Lack of Outside Support (2 items). Internal consistency was high overall and within physician/nursing and gender subgroups (Cronbach's alpha: 0.70 - 0.81). Median scores on Death/Dying of Patients were higher among those who directly cared for COVID-19 patients or worked in COVID-19 hospital units. These results are promising. Additional studies evaluating other dimensions of validity are necessary.

With the rise of competency-based medical education and workplace-based assessment (WBA) since the turn of the century, much has been written about methods of assessment. Direct observation and other sources of information have become standard in many clinical programs. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) have also become a central focus of assessment in the clinical workplace. Paper and pencil (one of the earliest mobile technologies!) to document observations have become almost obsolete with the advent of digital technology. Typically, clinical supervisors are asked to document assessment ratings using forms on computers. However, accessing these forms can be cumbersome and is not easily integrated into existing clinical workflows. With a call for more frequent documentation, this practice is hardly sustainable, and mobile technology is quickly becoming indispensable. Documentation of learner performance at the point of care merges WBA with patient care and WBA increasingly uses smartphone applications for this purpose.This AMEE Guide was developed to support institutions and programs who wish to use mobile technology to implement EPA-based assessment and, more generally, any type of workplace-based assessment. It covers backgrounds of WBA, EPAs and entrustment decision-making, provides guidance for choosing or developing mobile technology, discusses challenges and describes best practices.

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided challenges to all healthcare workers. While the brunt of treating COVID-19 patients fell upon adult providers, pediatricians also experienced significant stressors and disruptions. Academic pediatricians and trainees (fellows and residents) were redeployed to manage adult patients in hospitalist and intensive care settings and/or had major changes to their clinical schedules. In this study, we aimed to describe levels of self-reported depression, anxiety, and burnout in pediatric physicians following the initial wave of the pandemic at the largest integrated health system in New York State. A cross-sectional study was conducted among pediatric physicians who cared for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic within the Northwell Health System as part of the Northwell Wellbeing Registry, a longitudinal registry assessing the psychological impact of COVID-19 on healthcare providers. A total of 99 pediatric physician respondents were included in this study; 72% of whom were attendings, 28% of whom were trainees. Compared to attendings, trainees reported significantly higher proportions of burnout–emotional exhaustion (p = 0.0007) and burnout–depersonalization (p = 0.0011) on the Abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory. There was not a similar trend in probable depression or probable anxiety using the Patient Health Questionnaire. In a multivariable logistic regression model, being a trainee was significantly associated with increased odds of burnout–emotional exhaustion (OR 5.94, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.85–19.02). These findings suggest that fellows and residents were a vulnerable population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Training programs should pay special attention to their trainees during times of crisis, and future studies can help to identify protective factors to reduce the risk of burnout during these times.

Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians encountered significant COVID-19-related negative experiences and psychological distress in both their personal and professional lives. To understand the factors that negatively impact physician well-being, a number of studies have pointed to multiple work system factors such as excessive workload and workflow interruptions. In addition, studies have shown that positive interpersonal relationships that provide social support may also serve as a buffering role against psychological distress. The aim of our study explores the challenges and sources of support for physicians relative to mental health symptoms. Methods In this study, We used a cross-sectional study design with a convergent parallel mixed method approach combining both qualitative and quantitative data collected in parallel from a self-report questionnaire immediately following the first wave of COVID-19. The aim of our study explores the challenges and sources of support for physicians relative to mental health symptoms. Results Of the 457 physicians in the study, the most frequently potential negative occupational experiences were, “Being at risk of contracting COVID-19 from patients/co-workers” (90.5%) and “Contact with distressed family members who cannot be with a loved one” (69.5%). We identified five common themes for main sources of social support (e.g. emotional support from family/friends) and six themes for challenges (e.g., work-related demands exacerbated by the pandemic). Discussion Our study highlights COVID-19 and other pandemic-related challenges that negatively impacted the mental health of physicians. Interventions that provide targeted organizational supports (e.g. sufficient PPE and child support), as well as specific sources of support (e.g. family and emotional), can attenuate those challenges and stressors experienced during a pandemic.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text The pandemic poses a significant threat to the mental health of the physician workforce potentially impacting the care that patients receive. Continued monitoring of pandemic impacts and implementation of appropriately tailored interventions are critical. Objective: To examine the association between a number of negative COVID-19 occupational experiences and probable anxiety, depression, and PTSD among physicians. Methods: Cross-sectional examination of longitudinal registry data consisting of physician personal and occupational well-being. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to determine the association between negative COVID-19 experiences and outcomes. Results: Of the 620 eligible physicians, approximately half were female (49%), and 71% white with a mean age of 46.51 (SD = 13.28). A one-point increase in negative experience score was associated with a 23% increase in probable anxiety (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.14–1.34), a 23% increase in probable depression (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13–1.33), and a 41% increase in probable PTSD (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.30–1.52). Conclusions: Negative pandemic experiences were strongly associated with adverse mental health outcomes while greater resilience was protective.

Purpose To better prepare for potential future large-scale redeployments, this study examines quality of supervision and care as perceived by redeployed residents, fellows, and attendings during a COVID-19 surge. Method During April and May 2020, attendings, fellows, and residents redeployed at 2 teaching hospitals were invited to participate in a survey, which included questions on respondents’ prior experience; redeployed role; amount of supervision needed and received; and perceptions of quality of supervision, patient care, and interprofessional collaboration. Frequencies, means, and P values were calculated to compare perceptions by experience and trainee status. Narrative responses to 2 open-ended questions were independently coded; themes were constructed. Results Overall, 152 of 297 (51.2%) individuals responded, including 64 of 142 attendings (45.1%), 40 of 79 fellows (50.6%), and 48 of 76 residents (63.2%). Fellows and attendings, regardless of prior experience, perceived supervision as adequate. In contrast, experienced residents reported receiving more supervision than needed, while inexperienced residents reported receiving less supervision than needed and rated overall supervision as poor. Attendings, fellows, and experienced residents rated the overall quality of care as acceptable to good, whereas inexperienced residents perceived overall quality of care as worse to much worse, particularly when compared with baseline. Conclusions Narrative themes indicated that the quality of supervision and care was buffered by strong camaraderie, a culture of informal consultation, team composition (mixing experienced with inexperienced), and clinical decision aids. The markedly negative view of inexperienced residents suggests a higher risk for disillusionment, perhaps even moral injury, during future redeployments. Implications for planning are explored.

Purpose To determine whether overall situational judgment test (SJT) scores are associated with programs’ clinical competency committee (CCC) ratings of trainee professionalism, any concerning behavior, and concerning behavior requiring active remediation at 2 time periods. Method In fall 2019, trainees from 17 U.S. programs (16 residency, 1 fellowship) took an online 15-scenario SJT developed to measure 7 dimensions of professionalism. CCC midyear and year-end (6 months and 1 year following SJT completion, respectively) professionalism scores and concern ratings were gathered for academic year 2019–2020. Analyses were conducted to determine whether overall SJT scores related to overall professionalism ratings, trainees displaying any concerns, and trainees requiring active remediation at both time periods. Results Overall SJT scores correlated positively with midyear and year-end overall professionalism ratings ( r = .21 and .14, P < .001 and = .03, respectively). Holding gender and race/ethnicity constant, a 1 standard deviation (SD) increase in overall SJT score was associated with a .20 SD increase in overall professionalism ratings at midyear ( P = .005) and a .22 SD increase at year-end ( P = .001). Holding gender and race/ethnicity constant, a 1 SD increase in overall SJT score decreased the odds of a trainee displaying any concerns by 37% (odds ratio [OR] 95% confidence interval [CI]: [.44, .87], P = .006) at midyear and 34% (OR 95% CI: [.46, .95], P = .025) at year-end and decreased the odds of a trainee requiring active remediation by 51% (OR 95% CI: [.25, .90], P = .02) at midyear. Conclusions Overall SJT scores correlated positively with midyear and year-end overall professionalism ratings and were associated with whether trainees exhibited any concerning behavior at midyear and year-end and whether trainees needed active remediation at midyear. Future research should investigate whether other potential professionalism measures are associated with concerning trainee behavior.

OBJECTIVE:The psychiatric mental status examination is a fundamental aspect of the psychiatric clinical interview. However, despite its importance, little emphasis has been given to evidence-based instructional design. Therefore, this review summarizes the literature from an instructional design perspective with the aim of uncovering design strategies that have been used for teaching the psychiatric interview and mental status examination to health professionals. METHODS:The authors conducted a scoping review. Multiple databases, reference lists, and the gray literature were searched for relevant publications across educational levels and professions. A cognitive task analysis and an instructional design framework was used to summarize and chart the findings. RESULTS:A total of 61 articles from 17 countries in six disciplines and three educational levels were identified for data extraction and analysis. Most studies were from the USA, presented as educational case reports, and carried out in undergraduate education in the field of psychiatry. Few articles described the instructional rationale for their curriculum. None of the studies compared the effectiveness of different instructional design components. Reported learning activities for each task domain (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) and for each step of an instructional design process were charted. Most articles reported the use of introductory seminars or lectures in combination with digital learning material (videos and virtual patients in more recent publications) and role-play exercises. CONCLUSIONS:Educators in psychiatry should consider all task domains of the psychiatric interview and mental status examination. Currently, there is a lack of empirical research on expertise acquisition and use of instructional design frameworks in this context.

Recent research has explored computational tools to manage workplace stress via personal sensing, a measurement paradigm in which behavioral data streams are collected from technologies including smartphones, wearables, and personal computers. As these tools develop, they invite inquiry into how they can be appropriately implemented towards improving workers' well-being. In this study, we explored this proposition through formative interviews followed by a design provocation centered around measuring burnout in a U.S. resident physician program. Residents and their supervising attending physicians were presented with medium-fidelity mockups of a dashboard providing behavioral data on residents' sleep, activity and time working; self-reported data on residents' levels of burnout; and a free text box where residents could further contextualize their well-being. Our findings uncover tensions around how best to measure workplace well-being, who within a workplace is accountable for worker stress, and how the introduction of such tools remakes the boundaries of appropriate information flows between worker and workplace. We conclude by charting future work confronting these tensions, to ensure personal sensing is leveraged to truly improve worker well-being.

Research has shown that taking 'timeouts' in medical practice improves performance and patient safety. However, the benefits of taking timeouts, or pausing, are not sufficiently acknowledged in workplaces and training programmes. To promote this acknowledgement, we suggest a systematic conceptualisation of the medical pause, focusing on its importance, processes and implementation in training programmes. By employing insights from educational and cognitive psychology, we first identified pausing as an important skill to interrupt negative momentum and bolster learning. Subsequently, we categorised constituent cognitive processes for pausing skills into two phases: the decision-making phase (determining when and how to take pauses) and the executive phase (applying relaxation or reflection during pauses). We present a model that describes how relaxation and reflection during pauses can optimise cognitive load in performance. Several strategies to implement pause training in medical curricula are proposed: intertwining pause training with training of primary skills, providing second-order scaffolding through shared control and employing auxiliary tools such as computer-based simulations with a pause function.