Newly Acquired Burnout During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Retrospective Cohort Study on the Experiences of New York State Primary Care Clinicians.

The well-being of primary care clinicians represents an area of increasing interest amid concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic may have exacerbated already high prevalence rates of clinician burnout. This retrospective cohort study was designed to identify demographic, clinical, and work-specific factors that may have contributed to newly acquired burnout after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. An anonymous web-based questionnaire distributed in August 2020 to New York State (NYS) primary care clinicians, via email outreach and newsletters, produced 1,499 NYS primary care clinician survey respondents. Burnout assessment was measured pre-pandemic and early in the pandemic using a validated single-item question with a 5-point scale ranging from (1) enjoy work to (5) completely burned out. Demographic and work factors were assessed via the self-reporting questionnaire. Thirty percent of 1,499 survey respondents reported newly acquired burnout during the early pandemic period. This was more often reported by clinicians who were women, were younger than 56 years old, had adult dependents, practiced in New York City, had dual roles (patient care and administration), and were employees. Lack of control in the workplace prior to the pandemic was predictive of burnout early in the pandemic, while work control changes experienced following the pandemic were associated with newly acquired burnout. Low response rate and potential recall bias represent limitations. These findings demonstrate that reporting of burnout increased among primary care clinicians during the pandemic, partially due to varied and numerous work environment and systemic factors.

Implementation of a formal pharmacy residency research certificate program.

PURPOSE: We describe the structure, implementation, and initial evaluation of a formal residency research certificate program (RRCP) designed to further advance residents' knowledge and skills in research in an effort to better prepare residents for research involvement during their careers. SUMMARY: Pharmacy residency programs vary in the degree of emphasis on research education and training and the structure of resident research activities. Limited data describing formal research education and training for pharmacy residents are available. To better educate and prepare residents in the research process, State University of New York Upstate University Hospital developed and implemented a formal RRCP designed to educate and train residents in essential areas of the research process. Research seminars are delivered by preceptors with experience and training in research throughout the academic year to align with residency project tasks. Residents are also required to complete at least 1 residency project and submit a manuscript suitable for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Upon successful completion of the program and project requirements, residents earn a certificate of completion. Initial data collected through formal resident assessments before and after RRCP completion demonstrated significant improvement in research knowledge (from an average score of 61.3% out of 100% to an average score of 84.7%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Post-RRCP assessment showed improvements in residents' confidence in several areas of research, including but not limited to research project design, ethical and regulatory principles of research, data collection, selection of appropriate statistical tests, manuscript writing, and the publication process. Residents strongly agreed that the RRCP improved their overall knowledge and perceptions of research.

Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society: A Commitment to Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Service in the Profession of Medicine.

With a motto of "Be Worthy to Serve the Suffering," Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society (AΩA) supports the importance, inclusion, and development of a culturally and ethnically diverse medical profession with equitable access for all. The underrepresentation of minorities in medical schools and medicine continues to be a challenge for the medical profession, medical education, and AΩA. AΩA has worked, and continues to work, to ensure the development of diverse leaders, fostering within them the objectivity and equity to be inclusive servant leaders who understand and embrace diversity in all its forms.Inclusion of talented individuals from different backgrounds benefits patient care, population health, education, and scientific discovery. AΩA values an inclusive, diverse, fair, and equitable work and learning environment for all and supports the medical profession in its work to achieve a welcoming, inclusive environment in teaching, learning, caring for patients, and collaboration.The diversity of medical schools is changing and will continue to change. AΩA is committed to continuing to work with its members, medical school deans, and AΩA chapters to assure that AΩA elections are unbiased and based on the values of AΩA and the profession of medicine in service to patients and the profession.Progress toward diversity, inclusion, and equity is more than simply checking off a box or responding to criticism-it is about being and developing diverse excellent physicians. AΩA and all those in the medical profession must continue to guide medicine to be unbiased, open, accepting, inclusive, and culturally aware in order to "Be Worthy to Serve the Suffering."

Toward Defining the Foundation of the MD Degree: Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency.

Currently, no standard defines the clinical skills that medical students must demonstrate upon graduation. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education bases its standards on required subject matter and student experiences rather than on observable educational outcomes. The absence of such established outcomes for MD graduates contributes to the gap between program directors' expectations and new residents' performance.In response, in 2013, the Association of American Medical Colleges convened a panel of experts from undergraduate and graduate medical education to define the professional activities that every resident should be able to do without direct supervision on day one of residency, regardless of specialty. Using a conceptual framework of entrustable professional activities (EPAs), this Drafting Panel reviewed the literature and sought input from the health professions education community. The result of this process was the publication of 13 core EPAs for entering residency in 2014. Each EPA includes a description, a list of key functions, links to critical competencies and milestones, and narrative descriptions of expected behaviors and clinical vignettes for both novice learners and learners ready for entrustment.The medical education community has already begun to develop the curricula, assessment tools, faculty development resources, and pathways to entrustment for each of the 13 EPAs. Adoption of these core EPAs could significantly narrow the gap between program directors' expectations and new residents' performance, enhancing patient safety and increasing residents', educators', and patients' confidence in the care these learners provide in the first months of their residency training.

Changes in medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions from 2003 to 2012: a multi-institutional follow-up survey.

PURPOSE: To ascertain whether changes occurred in medical student exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions from 2003-2012, which factors influence exposure and attitudes, and whether exposure and attitudes influence future plans to interact with drug companies. METHOD: In 2012, the authors surveyed 1,269 third-year students at eight U.S. medical schools. Items explored student exposure to, attitudes toward, and future plans regarding drug company interactions. The authors compared 2012 survey data with their 2003 survey data from third-year students at the same schools. RESULTS: The 2012 response rate was 68.2% (866/1,269). Compared with 2003, in 2012, students were significantly less frequently exposed to interactions (1.6/month versus 4.1/month, P < .001), less likely to feel entitled to gifts (41.8% versus 80.3%, P < .001), and more apt to feel gifts could influence them (44.3% versus 31.2%, P < .001). In 2012, 545/839 students (65.0%) reported private outpatient offices were the main location of exposure to pharmaceutical representatives, despite spending only 18.4% of their clerkship-rotation time there. In 2012, 310/703 students (44.1%) were unaware their schools had rules restricting interactions, and 467/837 (55.8%) planned to interact with pharmaceutical representatives during residency. CONCLUSIONS: Students in 2012 had less exposure to drug company interactions and were more likely to have skeptical attitudes than students in 2003. These changes are consistent with national organizations' recommendations to limit and teach about these interactions. Continued efforts to study and influence students' and physician role models' exposures to and attitudes about drug companies are warranted.

Relationships between drug company representatives and medical students: medical school policies and attitudes of student affairs deans and third-year medical students.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to ascertain the details of medical school policies about relationships between drug companies and medical students as well as student affairs deans' attitudes about these interactions. METHODS: In 2005, the authors surveyed deans and student affairs deans at all U.S. medical schools and asked whether their schools had a policy about relationships between drug companies and medical students. They asked deans at schools with policies to summarize them, queried student affairs deans regarding their attitudes about gifts, and compared their attitudes with those of students who were studied previously. RESULTS: Independently of each other, 114 out of 126 deans (90.5%) and 114 out of 126 student affairs deans (90.5%) responded (identical numbers are not misprints). Ten schools had a policy regarding relationships between medical students and drug company representatives. Student affairs deans were much more likely than students to perceive that gifts were inappropriate. CONCLUSION: These 2005 policies show trends meriting review by current medical schools in considering how to comply with the 2008 Association of American Medical Colleges recommendations about relationships between drug companies and medical students or physicians.

Do attending physicians, nurses, residents, and medical students agree on what constitutes medical student abuse?

BACKGROUND: Whether attending physicians, residents, nurses, and medical students agree on what constitutes medical student abuse, its severity, or influencing factors is unknown. METHOD: We surveyed 237 internal medicine attending physicians, residents, medical students, and nurses at 13 medical schools after viewing five vignettes depicting potentially abusive behaviors. RESULTS: The majority of each group felt the belittlement, ethnic insensitivity, and sexual harassment scenarios represented abuse but that excluding a student from participating in a procedure did not. Only a majority of attending physicians considered the negative feedback scenario as abuse. Medical students rated abuse severity significantly lower than other groups in the belittlement scenario (p<.05). Respondents who felt abused as students were more likely to rate behaviors as abusive (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The groups generally agree on what constitutes abuse, but attending physicians and those abused as students may perceive more behaviors as abusive.

Medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions: a national survey.

CONTEXT: While exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions among residents have been studied extensively, relatively little is known about relationships between drug companies and medical students. OBJECTIVE: To measure third-year medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In 2003, we distributed a 64-item anonymous survey to 1143 third-year students at 8 US medical schools, exploring their exposure and response to drug company interactions. The schools' characteristics included a wide spectrum of ownership types, National Institutes of Health funding, and geographic locations. In 2005, we conducted a national survey of student affairs deans to measure the prevalence of school-wide policies on drug company-medical student interactions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Monthly frequency of students' exposure to various activities and gifts during clerkships, and attitudes about receiving gifts. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 826/1143 (72.3%), with range among schools of 30.9%-90.7%. Mean exposure for each student was 1 gift or sponsored activity per week. Of respondents, 762/818 (93.2%) were asked or required by a physician to attend at least 1 sponsored lunch. Regarding attitudes, 556/808 (68.8%) believed gifts would not influence their practices and 464/804 (57.7%) believed gifts would not affect colleagues' practices. Of the students, 553/604 (80.3%) believed that they were entitled to gifts. Of 183 students who thought a gift valued at less than $50 was inappropriate, 158 (86.3%) had accepted one. The number of students who simultaneously believed that sponsored grand rounds are educationally helpful and are likely to be biased was 452/758 (59.6%). Students at 1 school who had attended a seminar about drug company-physician relationships were no more likely than the nonattending classmates to show skepticism. Of the respondents, 704/822 (85.6%) did not know if their school had a policy on these relationships. In a national survey of student affairs deans, among the 99 who knew their policy status, only 10 (10.1%) reported having school-wide policies about these interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Student experiences and attitudes suggest that as a group they are at risk for unrecognized influence by marketing efforts. Research should focus on evaluating methods to limit these experiences and affect the development of students' attitudes to ensure that physicians' decisions are based solely on helping each patient achieve the greatest possible benefit.