Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance. RESULTS: One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel. CONCLUSIONS: The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Health Disparities in Children and Adolescents Living in LMIC During COVID-19 Pandemic.

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this editorial is to introduce the pediatric global health issue focusing on health disparities emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents living in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Recent Findings: As the COVID-19 pandemic ensues, children and adolescents living in LMIC have been disproportionately affected by socio-economic and mitigation practices, leading to widening disparities in health and the social determinants of health that influence their well-being. Summary: This pediatric global health issue brings to bare the extent, range, and nature of these health disparities, integrated with expert viewpoints, to prompt critical dialogue to address these complex problems.

Remote learning developments in postgraduate medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic - A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 71.

BACKGROUND: Prior reviews investigated medical education developments in response to COVID-19, identifying the pivot to remote learning as a key area for future investigation. This review synthesized online learning developments aimed at replacing previously face-to-face 'classroom' activities for postgraduate learners. METHODS: Four online databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsychINFO, and PubMed) and MedEdPublish were searched through 21 December 2020. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias. The PICRAT technology integration framework was applied to examine how teachers integrated and learners engaged with technology. A descriptive synthesis and outcomes were reported. A thematic analysis explored limitations and lessons learned. RESULTS: Fifty-one publications were included. Fifteen collaborations were featured, including international partnerships and national networks of program directors. Thirty-nine developments described pivots of existing educational offerings online and twelve described new developments. Most interventions included synchronous activities (n Fif5). Virtual engagement was promoted through chat, virtual whiteboards, polling, and breakouts. Teacher's use of technology largely replaced traditional practice. Student engagement was largely interactive. Underpinning theories were uncommon. Quality assessments revealed moderate to high risk of bias in study reporting and methodology. Forty-five developments assessed reaction; twenty-five attitudes, knowledge or skills; and two behavior. Outcomes were markedly positive. Eighteen publications reported social media or other outcomes, including reach, engagement, and participation. Limitations included loss of social interactions, lack of hands-on experiences, challenges with technology and issues with study design. Lessons learned highlighted the flexibility of online learning, as well as practical advice to optimize the online environment. CONCLUSIONS: This review offers guidance to educators attempting to optimize learning in a post-pandemic world. Future developments would benefit from leveraging collaborations, considering technology integration frameworks, underpinning developments with theory, exploring additional outcomes, and designing and reporting developments in a manner that supports replication.

Online learning developments in undergraduate medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 69.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic spurred an abrupt transition away from in-person educational activities. This systematic review investigated the pivot to online learning for nonclinical undergraduate medical education (UGME) activities and explored descriptions of educational offerings deployed, their impact, and lessons learned. METHODS: The authors systematically searched four online databases and conducted a manual electronic search of MedEdPublish up to December 21, 2020. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias. A third author resolved discrepancies. Findings were reported in accordance with the STORIES (STructured apprOach to the Reporting in healthcare education of Evidence Synthesis) statement and BEME guidance. RESULTS: Fifty-six articles were included. The majority (n = 41) described the rapid transition of existing offerings to online formats, whereas fewer (n = 15) described novel activities. The majority (n = 27) included a combination of synchronous and asynchronous components. Didactics (n = 40) and small groups (n = 26) were the most common instructional methods. Teachers largely integrated technology to replace and amplify rather than transform learning, though learner engagement was often interactive. Thematic analysis revealed unique challenges of online learning, as well as exemplary practices. The quality of study designs and reporting was modest, with underpinning theory at highest risk of bias. Virtually all studies (n = 54) assessed reaction/satisfaction, fewer than half (n = 23) assessed changes in attitudes, knowledge or skills, and none assessed behavioral, organizational or patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: UGME educators successfully transitioned face-to-face instructional methods online and implemented novel solutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although technology's potential to transform teaching is not yet fully realized, the use of synchronous and asynchronous formats encouraged virtual engagement, while offering flexible, self-directed learning. As we transition from emergency remote learning to a post-pandemic world, educators must underpin new developments with theory, report additional outcomes and provide details that support replication.

COVID-19 and Moral Distress: A Pediatric Critical Care Survey.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress adversely affects the delivery of high-quality patient care and places health care professionals at risk for burnout, moral injury, and the loss of professional integrity. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether pediatric critical care professionals are experiencing moral distress during the COVID-19 pandemic and, if so, for what reasons. METHODS: An exploratory survey of pediatric critical care professionals was conducted via the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators Network from April to May 2020. The survey was derived from a framework integrating contemporary literature on moral distress, moral resilience, and expert consensus. Integration of descriptive statistics for quantitative data and thematic analysis for qualitative data yielded mixed insights. RESULTS: Overall, 85.8% of survey respondents reported moral distress. Nurses reported higher degrees of moral distress than other professional groups. Inducers of moral distress were related to challenges to professional integrity and lack of organizational support. Five themes were identified: (1) psychological safety, (2) expectations of leadership, (3) connectedness through a moral community, (4) professional identity challenges, and (5) professional versus social responsibility. Most respondents were confident in their ability to reason through ethical dilemmas (76.0%) and think clearly when confronting an ethical challenge even when pressured (78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, pediatric critical care professionals are experiencing moral distress due to various factors that challenge their professional integrity. Despite these challenges, they also exhibit attributes of moral resilience. Organizations have opportunities to cultivate a psychologically safe and healthy work environment to mitigate anticipatory, present, and lingering moral distress.

Virtual Communication Embedded Bedside ICU Rounds: A Hybrid Rounds Practice Adapted to the Coronavirus Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 containment strategies created challenges with patient-centered ICU rounds. We examined how hybrid rounds with virtual communication added to in-person rounds could facilitate social distancing while maintaining patient-centered care. DESIGN: Continuous quality improvement. SETTING: Quaternary care referral pediatric hospital. PATIENTS: Daytime rounds conducted on PICU patients. INTERVENTIONS: Following a needs assessment survey and pilot trials, multiple technological solutions were implemented in a series of plan-do-study-act cycles. Hybrid rounds model was deployed where a videoconference platform was used to establish communication between the bedside personnel (nurse, patient/family, and partial ICU team) with remotely located remaining ICU team, ancillary, and consultant providers. Floor labels marking 6-feet distance were placed for rounders. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcome metrics included compliance with social distancing, mixed methods analysis of surveys, direct interviews of providers and families, and reports of safety concerns. The clinicians adopted hybrid rounds readily. Compliance with social distancing and use of floor labels needed reminders. One-hundred fourteen providers completed the feedback survey. Twenty-five providers and 11 families were interviewed. Feedback about hybrid rounds included inability to teach effectively, suboptimal audio-video quality, loss of situational awareness of patient/unit acuity, alarm interference, and inability to socially distance during other ICU interactions. Benefits noted were improved ancillary input, fewer interruptions, improved efficiency, opportunity to integrate with data platforms, and engage remote consultants and families. Nurses and families appreciated the efforts to ensure safety but wanted the ICU attending/fellow supervising the team to participate at bedside, during rounds. Clinicians appreciated the multidisciplinary input but felt that teaching was difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid rounds employed during pandemic facilitated social distancing while retaining patient-centered multidisciplinary ICU rounds but compromised teaching during rounds. A change to ingrained rounding habits needs team commitment and ongoing optimization. The hybrid rounds model has potential for generalizability to other settings.

An update on developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A BEME scoping review: BEME Guide No. 64.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has fundamentally altered how education is delivered. Gordon et al. previously conducted a review of medical education developments in response to COVID-19; however, the field has rapidly evolved in the ensuing months. This scoping review aims to map the extent, range and nature of subsequent developments, summarizing the expanding evidence base and identifying areas for future research. METHODS: The authors followed the five stages of a scoping review outlined by Arskey and O'Malley. Four online databases and MedEdPublish were searched. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Included articles described developments in medical education deployed in response to COVID-19 and reported outcomes. Data extraction was completed by two authors and synthesized into a variety of maps and charts. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven articles were included: 104 were from North America, Asia and Europe; 51 were undergraduate, 41 graduate, 22 continuing medical education, and 13 mixed; 35 were implemented by universities, 75 by academic hospitals, and 17 by organizations or collaborations. The focus of developments included pivoting to online learning (n = 58), simulation (n = 24), assessment (n = 11), well-being (n = 8), telehealth (n = 5), clinical service reconfigurations (n = 4), interviews (n = 4), service provision (n = 2), faculty development (n = 2) and other (n = 9). The most common Kirkpatrick outcome reported was Level 1, however, a number of studies reported 2a or 2b. A few described Levels 3, 4a, 4b or other outcomes (e.g. quality improvement). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review mapped the available literature on developments in medical education in response to COVID-19, summarizing developments and outcomes to serve as a guide for future work. The review highlighted areas of relative strength, as well as several gaps. Numerous articles have been written about remote learning and simulation and these areas are ripe for full systematic reviews. Telehealth, interviews and faculty development were lacking and need urgent attention.

Developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 63.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic in March 2020. This rapid systematic review synthesised published reports of medical educational developments in response to the pandemic, considering descriptions of interventions, evaluation data and lessons learned. METHODS: The authors systematically searched four online databases and hand searched MedEdPublish up to 24 May 2020. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias for included articles. Discrepancies were resolved by a third author. A descriptive synthesis and outcomes were reported. RESULTS: Forty-nine articles were included. The majority were from North America, Asia and Europe. Sixteen studies described Kirkpatrick's outcomes, with one study describing levels 1-3. A few papers were of exceptional quality, though the risk of bias framework generally revealed capricious reporting of underpinning theory, resources, setting, educational methods, and content. Key developments were pivoting educational delivery from classroom-based learning to virtual spaces, replacing clinical placement based learning with alternate approaches, and supporting direct patient contact with mitigated risk. Training for treating patients with COVID-19, service reconfiguration, assessment, well-being, faculty development, and admissions were all addressed, with the latter categories receiving the least attention. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights several areas of educational response in the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and identifies a few articles of exceptional quality that can serve as models for future developments and educational reporting. There was often a lack of practical detail to support the educational community in enactment of novel interventions, as well as limited evaluation data. However, the range of options deployed offers much guidance for the medical education community moving forward and there was an indication that outcome data and greater detail will be reported in the future.