The Big Sibling program: Impact of a medical student-resident mentorship program during the surgery clerkship.

BACKGROUND: We created a Big Sibling mentorship program for medical students and studied the program effects. METHODS: Between July 2019 to December 2020, students completing their surgery clerkship were paired with a Big Sibling surgical research resident. Participation in and perceptions of the program were assessed by survey. RESULTS: 81 medical students and 25 residents participated with a 79% and 95% survey response rate, respectively. The most valuable topics discussed included ward skills, personal development and career advising. Students who interacted >2 times with their Big Sibling were more likely to perceive the operating room as a positive learning environment, view attendings as role models, and receive mentoring and feedback from residents and attendings (p = 0.03, 0.02, 0.01 respectively). 78% of residents thought the program was a positive experience and no residents found it burdensome. CONCLUSION: The Big Siblings program enhances the surgery clerkship learning environment. Students who engaged with their Big Sibling had a more positive view of the clerkship and the mentorship provided by residents and attendings.

Gauging the effects of COVID-related changes to the medical student surgical clerkship experience: a mixed-methods study

Purpose This study sought to understand the medical student experience on the restructured surgical clerkship during the COVID-era to provide guidance for future scenarios affecting student participation in clinical activities. Methods Medical students completing an anonymous 70-question survey at the conclusion of their surgical clerkship from June 2019 to October 2020 were divided into 2 cohorts: students completing their clerkship prior to March 2020 and after June 2020. Quantitative assessment was performed to evaluate the clerkship performance and perceptions. Resulting findings were used to construct an interview guide and conduct semi-structured interviews. Results Fifty-nine medical students rotated through the surgical clerkship prior to COVID and 23 during the COVID-era. No differences in perception of the surgical clerkship, participation in essential activities, or shelf examination scores were found. Students completing their clerkship during the COVID-era reported a lower perception of interaction and professional relationships with attending and resident surgeons (p = 0.03). Qualitatively, students completing their clerkship during the COVID-era struggled to balance clinical experiences with personal wellness and noted that building relationships with faculty was substantially more difficult. Conclusions There does not appear to be a difference in the level of participation in essential clerkship activities nor a diminished perception of learning between students completing their surgical clerkship before or during the pandemic. However, there does appear to be a difference in the relationships formed between students and attending surgeons. Altered didactic structures and apprenticeship-type rotations may help mitigate such effects. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00015-2.

Challenges of virtual interviewing for surgical fellowships: a qualitative analysis of applicant experiences.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced surgical fellowship programs to transition from in-person to remote applicant interviews; the virtual interviewing format presented new and unique challenges. We sought to understand applicants' perceived challenges to virtual interviewing for a surgical fellowship program. METHOD: A grounded theory-based qualitative study was performed utilizing semi-structured interviews with fellowship applicants from the 2020 fellowship match. All Fellowship Council-registered applicants were eligible. We purposefully sampled participants to balance across gender, specialty-choice, and academic versus community-program affiliation. Interviews were inductively analyzed by two researchers for prominent themes. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted. Participants were 60% male (n = 9), with 33% (n = 5) from non-academic institutions. They applied for the following fellowships: Advanced Gastrointestinal/Minimal Invasive (55%), Bariatric (30%), Hepatopancreatobiliary (10%) and Surgical Oncology (5%). Four main themes emerged to describe virtual interview process challenges: (1) perceived data deficiency, (2) superficial personal connections, (3) magnification of non-professionalism, and (4) logistical frustrations. Applicants recommend program directors provide more information about the fellowship prior to interview day and offer informal independent interactions with current and previous fellows. CONCLUSIONS: According to fellowship applicants, virtual interviews resulted in a lack of information for rank-list decision making ultimately requiring them to rely on other information avenues to base their decisions. These applicants have offered advice to fellowship program directors and future applicants to better optimize this process.

Redeployment of Health Care Workers in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study of Health System Leaders' Strategies.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the strategies used and critical considerations among an international sample of hospital leaders when mobilizing human resources in response to the clinical demands associated with the COVID-19 pandemic surge. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, qualitative research study designed to investigate strategies used by health system leaders from around the world when mobilizing human resources in response to the global COVD-19 pandemic. Prospective interviewees were identified through nonprobability and purposive sampling methods from May to July 2020. The primary outcomes were the critical considerations, as perceived by health system leaders, when redeploying health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic determined through thematic analysis of transcribed notes. Redeployment was defined as reassigning personnel to a different location or retraining personnel for a different task. RESULTS: Nine hospital leaders from 9 hospitals in 8 health systems located in 5 countries (United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea) were interviewed. Six hospitals in 5 health systems experienced a surge of critically ill patients with COVID-19, and the remaining 3 hospitals anticipated, but did not experience, a similar surge. Seven of 8 hospitals redeployed their health care workforce, and 1 had a redeployment plan in place but did not need to use it. Thematic analysis of the interview notes identified 3 themes representing effective practices and lessons learned when preparing and executing workforce redeployment: process, leadership, and communication. Critical considerations within each theme were identified. Because of the various expertise of redeployed personnel, retraining had to be customized and a decentralized flexible strategy was implemented. There were 3 concerns regarding redeployed personnel. These included the fear of becoming infected, the concern over their skills and patient safety, and concerns regarding professional loss (such as loss of education opportunities in their chosen profession). Transparency via multiple different types of communications is important to prevent the development of doubt and rumors. CONCLUSIONS: Redeployment strategies should critically consider the process of redeploying and supporting the health care workforce, decentralized leadership that encourages and supports local implementation of system-wide plans, and communication that is transparent, regular, consistent, and informed by data.