RESUMO
Background@#Workplace gender-based mistreatment (GBM) refers to negative or harmful behaviors directed towards employees. In healthcare settings, this can lead to job dissatisfaction and underperformance and potentially compromise patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine workplace GBM among European anesthesiologists and produce the first European Gender-based Mistreatment Rank in Anesthesiology. @*Methods@#We conducted a secondary analysis from a worldwide cross-sectional survey database consisting of a 46-item questionnaire exploring, among other outcomes, gender bias attributable to workplace attitudes. The survey completion rate was 80.8%. All respondents were selected from European countries. Associations between mistreatment and the remaining variables were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. A generalized linear mixed model was then used to quantify the impact of mistreatment in each European country. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. @*Results@#This study included 5,795 respondents from 43 European countries. The independent predictors of GBM were as follows: female gender, younger age, perceiving gender as a disadvantage for leadership, and perceiving gender as a disadvantage for research. The full model was statistically significant, indicating an ability to distinguish between those who experienced GBM and those who did not (P < 0.001). Thus, 26 European countries were ranked based on the prevalence of mistreatment, with Italy showing the best performance (lowest prevalence). @*Conclusions@#The aim of our study was to provide preliminary insight into GBM in anesthesiology in Europe, function as a key benchmark for gender equity, and chart the evolution of disparities over time.
RESUMO
The required adjustments precipitated by the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis have been challenging, but also represent a critical opportunity for the evolution and potential disruptive and constructive change of medical education. Given that the format of medical education is not fixed, but malleable and in fact must be adaptable to societal needs through ongoing reflexivity, we find ourselves in a potentially transformative learning phase for the field. An Association for Medical Education in Europe ASPIRE Academy group of 18 medical educators from seven countries was formed to consider this opportunity, and identified critical questions for collective reflection on current medical education practices and assumptions, with the attendant challenge to envision the future of medical education. This was achieved through online discussion as well as asynchronous collective reflections by group members. Four major themes and related conclusions arose from this conversation: Why we teach: the humanitarian mission of medicine should be reinforced; what we teach: disaster management, social accountability and embracing an environment of complexity and uncertainty should be the core; how we teach: open pathways to lean medical education and learning by developing learners embedded in a community context; and whom we teach: those willing to take professional responsibility. These collective reflections provide neither fully matured digests of the challenges of our field, nor comprehensive solutions; rather they are offered as a starting point for medical schools to consider as we seek to harness the learning opportunities stimulated by the pandemic.