Addressing Burnout Among Women Residents: Results from Focus Group Discussions.

Introduction: Physician burnout has been described as more common among women than men. Even if there are no gender-based differences in prevalence, risk factors, such as work/home integration/conflict and gendered biases, likely differ. Prior administrations of an annual resident wellness survey at a single urban academic institution confirmed that rates of burnout were higher among women, especially during the PGY-2 year. Methods: A series of focus groups of PGY-3 women residents across specialties were organized in 2019 at a single urban academic medical center. Given the number of participants, demographics were not collected to maintain participant anonymity. The moderator for all groups used a discussion guide consisting of eight open-ended questions based on a review of the literature. Results: Ten residents agreed to participate in one of four hour-long focus group discussions. While the residents identified some factors that were not gender-specific, they also discussed issues that they faced as women in medicine, including needing to work harder to prove themselves and unconscious gendered biases from faculty and patients. The residents thought that their well-being would be improved if their training programs better understood the experiences and needs of women residents and recommended a series of interventions, including improved mentoring and networking opportunities. Conclusions: Interventions to improve well-being need to consider gender-based differences. While mentoring and networking can help all residents, these may be especially useful for women and should be considered as a component of an overarching plan to improve diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging.

The Impact of Virtual Interviewing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Residency Application Process: One Institution's Experience.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of virtual interviewing during the COVID-19 pandemic on the residency application process and to compare applicant costs and time spent interviewing during the 2020-2021 application cycle with prior years. METHOD: Fourth-year medical students at the University of Kansas School of Medicine applying for first-year residency positions via the National Resident Matching Program Match completed an electronic 46-item survey after submitting their rank lists during each application cycle from 2015-2016 to 2020-2021. The authors used descriptive statistics and t tests to analyze and compare responses to demographics questions and questions regarding number of submitted applications, offered and completed interviews, ranked programs, costs, and time spent interviewing. They used thematic analysis to code respondents' narrative comments about the virtual interviewing experience. RESULTS: From 2015-2016 to 2020-2021, 994 (of 1,190; 83.5%) respondents completed the survey. From 2019-2020 to 2020-2021, the average total cost of applying to residency per applicant dropped by $3,566 (P < .001) and the average time spent interviewing dropped by 13.3 days (P < .001). At the same time, the average number of applications per applicant dropped by 3.4, and applicants completed the same number of interviews and ranked 2.3 fewer programs, none of which were statistically significant differences. Narrative comments from 113 (79%) respondents in 2020-2021 revealed 4 themes related to virtual interviewing: convenience of time and cost, positive aspects of the process, negative aspects of the process, and overall impressions of the program. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual interviewing during the 2020-2021 application cycle resulted in an approximately 80% reduction in cost for applicants and an approximately 50% decrease in time spent interviewing compared with previous years but was not associated with large increases in number of submitted applications, completed interviews, or ranked programs. Applicants generally perceived virtual interviewing as positive although they raised notable concerns.

Time and Financial Costs for Students Participating in the National Residency Matching Program (the Match©): 2015 to 2020.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to provide information to assist students, faculty, and staff in making critical career-determining decisions regarding the residency NRMP "Match©" process. METHODS: A 47-item survey questionnaire was developed and piloted on a regional medical school campus in 2015. The revised questionnaire was distributed each year from 2016 to 2020 to fourth-year medical students after rank lists had been submitted. The questionnaire incorporated a request for comments about the interviewing experience and suggestions to improve the process. This narrative feedback was coded using a thematic analysis. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 86.1% (897/1,042). Annual response rates ranged from 70.0% in 2020 to 97.0% in 2018. Respondents' average age was 27.3 (± 2.7) years and 50.0% (448/897) were male. Most applied to family medicine (164/897; 18.2%) and internal medicine (140/897; 15.6%). Eight specialties had fewer than ten applicants over the six-year period. The number of students applying to individual specialties fluctuated annually, but no specialty showed a consistent upward or downward trend over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: This study found huge differences in numbers of applications, expenses, and days interviewing. Students crave more guidance, a more efficient system, transparent communication with programs, and less pressure during the process. Reducing escalating volumes of applications is central to improving the system. Despite efforts to inform applicants better, student behavior is unlikely to change until they feel safe in the belief that lower and more realistic numbers of applications and interviews are likely to result in securing an appropriate residency position.

Use of a structured template to facilitate practice-based learning and improvement projects.

BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires residency programs to meet and demonstrate outcomes across 6 competencies. Measuring residents' competency in practice-based learning and improvement (PBLI) is particularly challenging. PURPOSE: We developed an educational tool to meet ACGME requirements for PBLI. The PBLI template helped programs document quality improvement (QI) projects and supported increased scholarly activity surrounding PBLI learning. METHODS: We reviewed program requirements for 43 residency and fellowship programs and identified specific PBLI requirements for QI activities. We also examined ACGME Program Information Form responses on PBLI core competency questions surrounding QI projects for program sites visited in 2008-2009. Data were integrated by a multidisciplinary committee to develop a peer-protected PBLI template guiding programs through process, documentation, and evaluation of QI projects. All steps were reviewed and approved through our GME Committee structure. RESULTS: An electronic template, companion checklist, and evaluation form were developed using identified project characteristics to guide programs through the PBLI process and facilitate documentation and evaluation of the process. During a 24 month period, 27 programs have completed PBLI projects, and 15 have reviewed the template with their education committees, but have not initiated projects using the template. DISCUSSION: The development of the tool generated program leaders' support because the tool enhanced the ability to meet program-specific objectives. The peer-protected status of this document for confidentiality and from discovery has been beneficial for program usage. The document aggregates data on PBLI and QI initiatives, offers opportunities to increase scholarship in QI, and meets the ACGME goal of linking measures to outcomes important to meeting accreditation requirements at the program and institutional level.