Transformative learning of medical trainees during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a transformative effect on individuals across the world, including those in healthcare. Transformative learning is an educational theory in which an individual's worldview is fundamentally altered through conscious reflection (Cognitive Rational), insights (Extrarational), or social reform (Social Critique). We utilized transformative learning theory to characterize the experiences of medical trainees during the pandemic. METHODS: We used the Transformative Learning Survey in September and October 2020 to evaluate the processes and outcomes of transformative learning in health professions students and housestaff at an academic medical center during the pandemic. We analyzed survey scores for three process domains and four outcome subdomains. We inductively coded the survey's two open-ended questions and performed qualitative and mixed-methods analyses. RESULTS: The most prominent TL outcome was Self-Awareness, Acting Differently was intermediate, and Openness and Worldview Shifts were lowest. Cognitive Rational and Social Critique processes were more prominent than Extrarational processes. Students were more likely than housestaff to undergo transformative learning through the Social Critique process (p = 0.025), in particular the sub-processes of Social Action (p = 0.023) and Ideology Critique (p = 0.010). Qualitative analysis via the aggregation of codes identified four responses to the pandemic: negative change, positive change, existential change, or no change. Negative changes (67.7%) were most common, with students reporting more of these changes than housestaff (74.8% vs 53.6%; p < 0.01). Only 8.4% of reported changes could be defined as transformative. CONCLUSIONS: Through the theoretical lens of transformative learning, our study provides insight into the lives of learners during the pandemic. Our finding that medical students were more likely to use Social Critique processes has multiple parallels in the literature. If leaders in academic medicine desire to create enlightened change agents through transformative learning, such education must continue throughout graduate medical education and beyond.

Gun violence incidence during the COVID-19 pandemic is higher than before the pandemic in the United States.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, gun violence (GV) in the United States (U.S.) was postulated to increase strain on already taxed healthcare resources, such as blood products, intensive care beds, personal protective equipment, and even hospital staff. This report aims to estimate the relative risk of GV in the U.S. during the pandemic compared to before the pandemic. Daily police reports corresponding to gun-related injuries and deaths in the 50 states and the District of Columbia from February 1st, 2019, to March 31st, 2021 were obtained from the GV Archive. Generalized linear mixed-effects models in the form of Poisson regression analysis were utilized to estimate the state-specific rates of GV. Nationally, GV rates were 30% higher between March 01, 2020, and March 31, 2021 (during the pandemic), compared to the same period in 2019 (before the pandemic) [intensity ratio (IR) = 1.30; 95% CI 1.29, 1.32; p < 0.0001]. The risk of GV was significantly higher in 28 states and significantly lower in only one state. National and state-specific rates of GV were higher during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same timeframe 1 year prior. State-specific steps to mitigate violence, or at a minimum adequately prepare for its toll during the COVID-19 pandemic, should be taken.

Perceptions of firearms in a cohort of women exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) in Central Pennsylvania.

BACKGROUND: Almost one-half of U.S. women will experience intimate partner violence (IPV), defined as physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner. IPV is associated with an increased risk of homicide, with firearms as the most commonly used weapon. We designed this study to better understand the correlation of interpersonal trauma exposures and demographic factors on firearm perceptions among a cohort of IPV-exposed women. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-seven women in central Pennsylvania with exposure to IPV were surveyed about perceptions of gun access, safety, and gun presence in the home. Trauma variables included IPV type, IPV recency, unwanted sexual exposure, and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Multivariable analyses examined three questions examining firearm perceptions controlling for trauma exposures and demographics. RESULTS: Ease of firearm acquisition: Women who were older (mean 44.92 years +/- SD 12.05), compared to women who were younger (40.91 +/- SD 11.81 years) were more likely to describe it as easy or very easy to acquire a gun (aOR 1.05, 95%CI 1.004, 1.10). Perceived safety in the proximity of a gun: Women with the highest ACE score were less likely to feel safe with a gun nearby (aOR 0.31, 95%CI 0.14, 0.67). Odds of guns in the home: Women who were divorced or separated (aOR 0.22, 95%CI 0.09, 0.54), women were widowed or single (aOR0.23, 95%CI 0.08, 0.67), and women who were partnered (aOR 0.45 95%CI 0.20, 0.97) had lower odds of having a gun in the home, compared to married women. There was no significant effect of the trauma variables on the odds of having a gun at home. CONCLUSIONS: Women with more severe childhood trauma felt less safe around firearms, but trauma exposures did not predict the perception of gun prevalence in the local community or gun ownership. Instead, demographic factors of marriage predicted presence of a gun in the home.

COVID-19 has united patients and providers against institutional betrayal in health care: A battle to be heard, believed, and protected.

In this commentary, researchers, health care consumers, and medical providers reflect on institutional betrayal during the COVID-19 pandemic in American and Canadian health care systems. Examples of institutional betrayal experienced by patients and their family members, as well as medical providers, are described. Although such examples may be more evident to the general public during the current pandemic, they do not represent new problems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).