Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 22
Filter
1.
2.
Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets ; 21(12): 2238-2252, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714873

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Some endocrinologists were involved in the management of patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. This study aims to analyze burnout levels among the Association of Medical Endocrinologists (AME) members before and during the pandemic. METHODS: We recruited two AME members samples at two different times: before COVID-19 (n = 811) and during the first wave of the ongoing pandemic (n = 579). Both the samples filled the Maslach Burnout Inventory. We performed MANOVAs to evaluate demographic and COVID-19 related differences in burnout levels and Pearson's Chi-square test to compare burnout severity before and during the pandemic. RESULTS: Women reported higher Emotional Exhaustion and reduced Professional Accomplishment than men. The oldest physicians had lower levels of Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization and higher Professional Accomplishment than younger workers. Independent contractors displayed lower levels of burnout compared to established contractors. Finally, the pandemic, per se, did not lead to changes in burnout levels. DISCUSSION: Women and young physicians are at higher risk of burnout. It is also possible that front- line professionals are at higher risk during a health care crisis. Moreover, it is likely that the length of exposure to the pandemic has not been sufficient to impact burnout levels. CONCLUSION: Short-term exposure to pandemic-related activities seemed to have a low impact on burnout severity, except for physicians directly involved in managing COVID-19 cases. It is strongly recommended the availability of psychological support in public hospitals.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Endocrinologists/psychology , Occupational Health , Psychological Distress , Workload/psychology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Burnout, Professional/diagnosis , Burnout, Professional/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Physicians, Women/psychology , Prevalence , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Sex Factors , Time Factors , Women, Working/psychology
3.
Lancet ; 398(10303): 920-930, 2021 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1593950

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has heightened interest in how physician mental health can be protected and optimised, but uncertainty and misinformation remain about some key issues. In this Review, we discuss the current literature, which shows that despite what might be inferred during training, physicians are not immune to mental illness, with between a quarter and a third reporting increased symptoms of mental ill health. Physicians, particularly female physicians, are at an increased risk of suicide. An emerging consensus exists that some aspects of physician training, working conditions, and organisational support are unacceptable. Changes in medical training and health systems, and the additional strain of working through a pandemic, might have amplified these problems. A new evidence-informed framework for how individual and organisational interventions can be used in an integrated manner in medical schools, in health-care settings, and by professional colleagues is proposed. New initiatives are required at each of these levels, with an urgent need for organisational-level interventions, to better protect the mental health and wellbeing of physicians.


Subject(s)
Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Physicians/psychology , Suicide/statistics & numerical data , Burnout, Professional , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/prevention & control , Pandemics , Physicians, Women/psychology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Suicide/prevention & control , Work Schedule Tolerance
5.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(9): 1327-1328, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1464000
6.
Ann Surg ; 274(2): 229-230, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1402756
9.
Ann Surg ; 273(4): 625-629, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1304016

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between surgeon gender and stress during the Covid-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: Although female surgeons face difficulties integrating work and home in the best of times, the Covid-19 pandemic has presented new challenges. The implications for the female surgical workforce are unknown. METHODS: This cross-sectional, multi-center telephone survey study of surgeons was conducted across 5 academic institutions (May 15-June 5, 2020). The primary outcome was maximum stress level, measured using the validated Stress Numerical Rating Scale-11. Mixed-effects generalized linear models were used to estimate the relationship between surgeon stress level and gender. RESULTS: Of 529 surgeons contacted, 337 surgeons responded and 335 surveys were complete (response rate 63.7%). The majority of female respondents were housestaff (58.1%), and the majority of male respondents were faculty (56.8%) (P = 0.008). A greater proportion of male surgeons (50.3%) than female surgeons (36.8%) had children ≤18 years (P = 0.015). The mean maximum stress level for female surgeons was 7.51 (SD 1.49) and for male surgeons was 6.71 (SD 2.15) (P < 0.001). After adjusting for the presence of children and training status, female gender was associated with a significantly higher maximum stress level (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings that women experienced more stress than men during the Covid-19 pandemic, regardless of parental status, suggest that there is more to the gendered differences in the stress experience of the pandemic than the added demands of childcare. Deliberate interventions are needed to promote and support the female surgical workforce during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Physicians, Women/psychology , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Surgeons/psychology , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Surveys , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Diseases/diagnosis , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Stress, Psychological/diagnosis , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
10.
Int Heart J ; 62(3): 465-469, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247696

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the lives of healthcare professionals, especially vulnerable physicians such as young or female cardiologists. In Japan, they are facing the fear of not only infection but also weak and unstable employment, difficulties in medical practice and training anxiety, implications for research and studying abroad, as well as worsened mental health issues due to social isolation. Conversely, some positive aspects are seen through the holding of remote meetings and conferences. Here, we suggest a new working style for cardiologists, as well as offer solutions to the medical employment problems that have been taken place in Japan.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Cardiologists/psychology , Occupational Health , Physicians, Women/psychology , Age Factors , Anxiety/etiology , Anxiety/therapy , Biomedical Research/methods , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiologists/education , Education, Medical, Graduate/methods , Employment , Female , Humans , Japan , Mental Health , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Occupational Diseases/therapy , Physical Distancing , Sexism/psychology , Social Isolation/psychology , Social Support , Vulnerable Populations
12.
J Womens Health (Larchmt) ; 30(4): 514-524, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147921

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has presented extreme challenges for health care workers. This study sought to characterize challenges faced by physician mothers, compare differences in challenges by home and work characteristics, and elicit specific needs and potential solutions. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods online survey of the Physician Moms Group (PMG) and PMG COVID19 Subgroup on Facebook from April 18th to 29th, 2020. We collected structured data on personal and professional characteristics and qualitative data on home and work concerns. We analyzed qualitative data thematically and used bivariate analyses to evaluate variation in themes by frontline status and children's ages. Results: We included 1,806 participants in analysis and identified 10 key themes. The most frequently identified need/solution was for Community and Government Support (n = 545, 47.1%). When comparing frontline and nonfrontline physicians, those on the frontline more frequently raised concerns about Personal Health and Safety (67.8% vs. 48.4%, p < 0.001), Organizational Communication and Relationships (31.8% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001), and Family Health and Safety (27.2 vs. 16.6, p < 0.001), while nonfrontline physicians more frequently addressed Patient Care and Safety (56.4% vs. 48.2%, p < 0.001) and Financial/Job Security (33.8% vs. 46.9%, p < 0.001). Participants with an elementary school-aged child more frequently raised concerns about Parenting/Homeschooling (44.0% vs. 31.1%, p < 0.001) and Work/Life Balance (28.4 vs. 13.7, p < 0.001), and participants with a preschool-aged child more frequently addressed Access to Childcare (24.0 vs. 7.7, p < 0.001) and Spouse/Partner Relationships (15.8 vs. 9.5, p < 0.001), when compared to those without children in these age groups. Conclusions: The physician workforce is not homogenous. Health care and government leaders need to understand these diverse challenges in order to meet physicians' professional and family needs during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Mothers/psychology , Occupational Stress/psychology , Pandemics , Physicians, Women/psychology , Work-Life Balance , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Mental Health , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
14.
Acad Med ; 96(9): 1254-1258, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1104982

ABSTRACT

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, women in medicine, including faculty, residents, medical students, and other health care workers (HCWs), are facing unparalleled challenges. The burdens of pandemic-associated increases in domestic and caregiving responsibilities, professional demands, health risks associated with contracting COVID-19, and the resulting psychosocial distress have exacerbated existing gender disparities at home, at work, and in academia. School and day care closures have created additional childcare needs, primarily for women, yet little support exists for parents and families. These increased childcare and domestic responsibilities have forced women HCWs, who make up the overwhelming majority of the workforce, to adapt their schedules and, in some cases, leave their jobs entirely. In this article, the authors detail how COVID-19 has exacerbated existing childcare accessibility and affordability issues as well as gender disparities. They argue that unless government and health care organization support for childcare increases, families, specifically women and children, will continue to suffer. Lack of access to affordable childcare can prevent HCWs from doing their jobs, including conducting and publishing academic scholarship. This poses incalculable risks to families, science, and society. COVID-19 should serve as a call to action to all sectors, including the government and health care organizations, to prioritize childcare provision and increase support for women HCWs, both now during the pandemic and going forward.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child Care/trends , Family , Health Personnel , Sexism/trends , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Child Care/economics , Child Care/organization & administration , Child Day Care Centers/economics , Child Day Care Centers/trends , Child Health/trends , Child Welfare/economics , Child Welfare/psychology , Child Welfare/trends , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/trends , Humans , Infant , Mental Health/trends , Physicians, Women/psychology , Physicians, Women/supply & distribution , Physicians, Women/trends , United States , Women's Health/trends
15.
Acad Med ; 96(6): 792-794, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1078860

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic and the upheaval it is causing may be leading to novel manifestations of the well-established mechanisms by which women have been marginalized in professional roles, robbing the field of the increased collective intelligence that exists when diverse perspectives are embraced. Unconscious bias, gendered expectations, and overt hostility minimize the contributions of women in academic medicine to the detriment of all. The current environment of heightened stress and new socially distant forms of communication may be exacerbating these well-recognized obstacles to women contributing to the field. Of note, none of these actions requires ill intent; all they require is the activation of unconscious biases and almost instinctive preferences and behaviors that favor the comfortable and familiar leadership of men in a time of extreme stress. The authors argue that it is time to investigate the frequency of behaviors that limit both the recognition and the very exercise of women's leadership during this pandemic, which is unprecedented but nevertheless may recur in the future. Leaders in health care must pay attention to equity, diversity, and inclusion given increases in undermining and harassing behaviors toward women during this crisis. The longer-term consequences of marginalizing women may hamper efforts to combat the next pandemic, so the time to flatten the rising gender bias curve in academic medicine is now.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/ethics , COVID-19/psychology , Physicians, Women/psychology , Sexism/prevention & control , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cultural Diversity , Female , Gender Equity , Humans , Leadership , Male , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sexism/psychology , Social Inclusion
17.
Ann Surg ; 273(4): 625-629, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1045792

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between surgeon gender and stress during the Covid-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: Although female surgeons face difficulties integrating work and home in the best of times, the Covid-19 pandemic has presented new challenges. The implications for the female surgical workforce are unknown. METHODS: This cross-sectional, multi-center telephone survey study of surgeons was conducted across 5 academic institutions (May 15-June 5, 2020). The primary outcome was maximum stress level, measured using the validated Stress Numerical Rating Scale-11. Mixed-effects generalized linear models were used to estimate the relationship between surgeon stress level and gender. RESULTS: Of 529 surgeons contacted, 337 surgeons responded and 335 surveys were complete (response rate 63.7%). The majority of female respondents were housestaff (58.1%), and the majority of male respondents were faculty (56.8%) (P = 0.008). A greater proportion of male surgeons (50.3%) than female surgeons (36.8%) had children ≤18 years (P = 0.015). The mean maximum stress level for female surgeons was 7.51 (SD 1.49) and for male surgeons was 6.71 (SD 2.15) (P < 0.001). After adjusting for the presence of children and training status, female gender was associated with a significantly higher maximum stress level (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings that women experienced more stress than men during the Covid-19 pandemic, regardless of parental status, suggest that there is more to the gendered differences in the stress experience of the pandemic than the added demands of childcare. Deliberate interventions are needed to promote and support the female surgical workforce during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Physicians, Women/psychology , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Surgeons/psychology , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Surveys , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Diseases/diagnosis , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Stress, Psychological/diagnosis , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
20.
Acad Med ; 96(2): e12-e13, 2021 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-925928
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL