A Strategic Approach to Implementation of Medical Mentorship Programs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Mentors influence medical trainees' experiences through career enhancement and psychosocial support, yet some trainees never receive benefits from involved mentors.Objective
Our goals were to examine the effectiveness of 2 interventions aimed at increasing the number of mentors in training programs, and to assess group differences in mentor effectiveness, the relationship between trainees' satisfaction with their programs given the presence of mentors, and the relationship between the number of trainees with mentors and postgraduate year (PGY).Methods
In group 1, a physician adviser funded by the graduate medical education department implemented mentorships in 6 residency programs, while group 2 involved a training program with funded physician mentoring time. The remaining 89 training programs served as controls. Chi-square tests were used to determine differences.Results
Survey responses from group 1, group 2, and controls were 47 of 84 (56%), 34 of 78 (44%), and 471 of 981 (48%, P?=?.38), respectively. The percentages of trainees reporting a mentor in group 1, group 2, and the control group were 89%, 97%, and 79%, respectively (P?=?.01). There were no differences in mentor effectiveness between groups. Mentored trainees were more likely to be satisfied with their programs (P?=?.01) and to report that faculty supported their professional aspirations (P?=?.001). Across all programs, fewer first-year trainees (59%) identified a mentor compared to PGY-2 through PGY-8 trainees (84%, P?ConclusionsA supported mentorship program is an effective way to create an educational environment that maximizes trainees' perceptions of mentorship and satisfaction with their training programs.
SUBMITTER: Caruso TJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4763391 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A Strategic Approach to Implementation of Medical Mentorship Programs.
Caruso Thomas J TJ Steinberg Diane H DH Piro Nancy N Walker Kimberly K Blankenburg Rebecca R Rassbach Caroline C Marquez Juan L JL Katznelson Laurence L Dohn Ann A
Journal of graduate medical education 20160201 1
<h4>Background</h4>Mentors influence medical trainees' experiences through career enhancement and psychosocial support, yet some trainees never receive benefits from involved mentors.<h4>Objective</h4>Our goals were to examine the effectiveness of 2 interventions aimed at increasing the number of mentors in training programs, and to assess group differences in mentor effectiveness, the relationship between trainees' satisfaction with their programs given the presence of mentors, and the relation ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMentorship models rarely seek generalizability across training programs at the graduate medical education (GME) level.ObjectiveWe examined the sustainability and effectiveness of an intervention to increase the number and usefulness of trainee mentorship.MethodsA 0.20 full-time equivalent GME faculty adviser position (MD, MEd) implemented mentorship programs in residencies and fellowships. In group 1, 6 GME programs implemented the mentorship strategies prior to 2014, which were used to measure whether the number of mentor relationships were longitudinally sustained. In group 2, 10 different GME programs implemented the mentorship strategies in 2016, which were used to measure whether the intervention immediately increased the number of mentor relationships. To measure mentorship usefulness, trainees rated mentors' ability to promote clinical skills and personal and professional development. The remaining programs were the comparison. Responses from the 2014 and 2016 annual institutional trainee survey were analyzed.ResultsThe incidence of group 1 reporting mentor relationships in 2014 compared to the incidence of group 1 in 2016 were 89% (41 of 46) and 95% (42 of 44), respectively, suggesting that the intervention was sustained for 2 years (P = .26). Group 2 showed a higher proportion of trainees reporting mentors in 2016 (88%, 149 of 170) compared to preintervention (66%, 71 of 108; P = .00001). Groups 1 and 2 reported significant increases in mentorship usefulness.ConclusionsA GME initiative to enhance mentoring across specialties in 16 GME training programs was self-sustaining and effective.
| S-EPMC6476078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Mentorship during residency training is correlated with improved outcomes. Many residency programs have implemented formal mentorship programs; however, reported data for these programs have not been previously synthesized. Thus, existing programs may fall short on delivering effective mentorship. Objective To synthesize current literature on formal mentorship programs in residency training in Canada and the United States, including program structure, outcomes, and evaluation. Methods In December 2019, the authors performed a scoping review of the literature in Ovid MEDLINE and Embase. The search strategy included keywords relevant to mentorship and residency training. Eligibility criteria included any study describing a formal mentorship program for resident physicians within Canada or the United States. Data from each study were extracted in parallel by 2 team members and reconciled. Results A total of 6567 articles were identified through the database search, and 55 studies met inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction and analysis. Though reported program characteristics were heterogenous, programs most commonly assigned a staff physician mentor to a resident mentee with meetings occurring every 3 to 6 months. The most common evaluation strategy was a satisfaction survey at a single time point. Few studies performed qualitative evaluations or used evaluation tools appropriate to the stated objectives. Analysis of data from qualitative studies allowed us to identify key barriers and facilitators for successful mentorship programs. Conclusions While most programs did not utilize rigorous evaluation strategies, data from qualitative studies provided insights into barriers and facilitators of successful mentorship programs, which can inform program design and improvement.
| S-EPMC10150829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePeer mentorship provides professional and personal support between physicians with similar experiences and levels of training. While peer mentorship has shown to benefit academic success and professional growth, little data has examined contextual factors, such as curricular change, that may affect the quality of these relationships. This study aims to explore the impact of a new, nationwide radiation oncology (RO) residency curriculum, known as competence by design (CBD), on peer mentorship experiences between Canadian RO residents.Methods and materialsA qualitative study, with a social constructivist approach, was conducted with 2 groups of Canadian RO residents. The first were those in the academic year before CBD implementation (non-CBD cohort), and the second were those in the inaugural year of CBD (CBD cohort). Semistructured 1-on-1 interviews were conducted to explore experiences of peer mentorship as it related to curriculum change. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed with deductive and inductive methods until data saturation.ResultsBetween April and December 2021, 14 participants (6 non-CBD and 8 CBD residents) from 8 out of 10 eligible English-speaking RO training programs across Canada participated. Three major themes were identified: (1) the CBD cohort identified fewer opportunities for peer mentorship, with specific concerns regarding new evaluation processes and uncertainty about the later stages of training; (2) there was minimal impact on specialty-specific learning; and (3) peer mentorship thrived when occurring as spontaneous in-person interactions.ConclusionsInaugural residents of a CBD curriculum perceived fewer opportunities for peer mentorship. There were specific concerns about new evaluative processes, though this did not affect specialty-specific learning. Peer mentorship was most impactful as informal and in-person interactions. Our findings suggest that unintended consequences of curriculum change may be mitigated by improving communication about new training objectives and increasing opportunities for informal interactions between residents.
| S-EPMC10965429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe conducted a process evaluation to assess how the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs ("the SA") was used in 15 countries that requested WHO's technical support in addressing unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion. The SA is a three-stage planning, policy, and program implementation process. We used the social ecological model (SEM) to analyze the contextual factors that influenced SA implementation.MethodsWe used a two-phased sequential approach to data collection and analysis. In Phase A, we conducted a document and literature review and synthesized data thematically. In Phase B, we conducted interviews with stakeholders who used the SA in the countries of interest. We used a qualitative method triangulation technique to analyze and combine data from both phases to understand how the SA was implemented in each country.ResultsData from 145 documents and 19 interviews described the SA process and activities in each country. All 15 countries completed Stage 1 activities. The activities of Stage 1 determined activities in subsequent stages and varied across countries. Following Stage 1, some countries focused on reforming policies to improve access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services whereas others focused on improving provider-level capacity to enhance SRH service quality and improving community-level SRH education. We identified factors across SEM levels that affected SA implementation, including individual- and community-level perceptions of using the SA and the recommendations that emerged from its use, organizational capacity to conduct SA activities, and how well these activities aligned with the existing political climate. Stakeholders perceived SA implementation to be country-driven and systematic in bringing attention to important SRH issues in their countries.ConclusionWe identified key success factors for influencing the individual, organization, and system change required for implementing the SA. These include sustaining stakeholder engagement for all SA stages, monitoring and reporting on activities, and leveraging activities and outputs from each SA stage to obtain technical and financial support for subsequent stages. Results may be used to optimize ongoing implementation efforts to improve access to and the quality of SRH services.
| S-EPMC5697396 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although the field of pharmacogenetics has existed for decades, practioners have been slow to implement pharmacogenetic testing in clinical care. Numerous publications describe the barriers to clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics. Recently, several freely available resources have been developed to help address these barriers. In this review, we discuss current programs that use preemptive genotyping to optimize the pharmacotherapy of patients. Array-based preemptive testing includes a large number of relevant pharmacogenes that impact multiple high-risk drugs. Using a preemptive approach allows genotyping results to be available prior to any prescribing decision so that genomic variation may be considered as an inherent patient characteristic in the planning of therapy. This review describes the common elements among programs that have implemented preemptive genotyping and highlights key processes for implementation, including clinical decision support.
| S-EPMC4607278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceBecause mentorship is critical for professional development and career advancement, it is essential to examine the status of mentorship and identify challenges that junior surgical faculty (assistant and associate professors) face obtaining effective mentorship.ObjectiveTo evaluate the mentorship experience for junior surgical faculty and highlight areas for improvement.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study was an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study including an anonymous survey on mentorship followed by semistructured interviews to expand on survey findings. Junior surgical faculty from 18 US academic surgery programs were included in the anonymous survey and interviews. Survey responses between "formal" (assigned by the department) vs "informal" (sought out by the faculty) mentors and male vs female junior faculty were compared using χ2 tests. Interview responses were analyzed for themes until thematic saturation was achieved. Survey responses were collected from November 2022 to August 2023, and interviews conducted from July to December 2023.ExposureMentorship from formal and/or informal mentors.Main outcomes and measuresSurvey gauged the availability and satisfaction with formal and informal mentorship; interviews assessed broad themes regarding mentorship.ResultsOf 825 survey recipients, 333 (40.4%) responded; 155 (51.7%) were male and 134 (44.6%) female. Nearly all respondents (319 [95.8%]) agreed or strongly agreed that mentorship is important to their surgical career, especially for professional networking (309 respondents [92.8%]), career advancement (301 [90.4%]), and research (294 [88.3%]). However, only 58 respondents (18.3%) had a formal mentor. More female than male faculty had informal mentors (123 [91.8%] vs 123 [79.4%]; P = .003). Overall satisfaction was higher with informal mentorship than formal mentorship (221 [85.0%] vs 40 [69.0%]; P = .01). Most male and female faculty reported no preferences in gender or race and ethnicity for their mentors. When asked if they had good mentor options if they wanted to change mentors, 141 (47.8%) responded no. From the interviews (n = 20), 6 themes were identified, including absence of mentorship infrastructure, preferred mentor characteristics, and optimizing mentorship.Conclusions and relevanceAcademic junior surgical faculty agree mentorship is vital to their careers. However, this study found that few had formal mentors and almost half need more satisfactory options if they want to change mentors. Academic surgical programs should adopt a framework for facilitating mentorship and optimize mentor-mentee relationships through alignment of mentor-mentee goals and needs.
| S-EPMC11375519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Mentoring of medical students remains a core pillar of medical education, yet the changing landscape of medicine has called for new and innovative mentoring models to guide students in professional development, career placement, and overall student well-being. The objective of this review is to identify and describe models of mentorship for US medical students. METHODS:We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews following PRISMA guidelines. We included original, English-language studies of any research design including descriptive studies that described a mentorship program at a US medical school designed for medical students. RESULTS:Our search yielded 3743 unique citations. Thirty articles met our inclusion criteria. There was significant diversity of the identified programs with regard to program objectives and size. The traditional dyad model of mentorship was the most frequently cited model, with a combination of models (dyad and group mentorship) cited as the second most common. Outcome measures of the programs were largely survey based, with satisfaction being the most measured outcome. Overall, satisfaction was highly rated throughout all the measured mentoring programs. Seven programs provided objective outcomes measures, including improved residency match data and increased scholarly productivity. The programs with objective outcomes measures were smaller, and 6/7 of them focused on a specific clinical area. Five of these programs relied on the traditional dyad model of mentorship. Cost and faculty time were the most frequently cited barriers to these programs. DISCUSSION:Our review demonstrates that mentoring programs for medical students can positively improve medical school satisfaction and career development. These results underscore the need for continued innovative mentoring programs to foster optimal student development in the setting of the increasingly competitive residency match process, growing expectations about student research productivity, and the national focus for overall student wellness.
| S-EPMC6848625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBurnout can have negative consequences for providers' health and patient care. Mentorship has positive effects including stress mitigation. We sought to evaluate the impact of a mentorship program on burnout in fourth-year medical students during their 4-week emergency medicine subinternship.MethodsThis was a prospective, quasi-experimental, mixed-methods study at two institutions. We assessed burnout using the Maslach Burnout Inventory, comprising three subscales: Emotional Exhaustion (EE), Depersonalization (DP), and Personal Accomplishment (PA). We compared changes in burnout scores before and after implementation of a resident-student mentorship program. We compared categorical variables using risk ratios and continuous variables using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. To account for potential confounders, we performed multivariable analysis. Students and mentors completed an evaluative survey. We reported descriptive statistics and performed thematic qualitative analysis on free-response data.ResultsA total of 135 students (intervention = 51; control = 84) and 59 mentors participated. Intervention students demonstrated decreased EE and DP and increased PA scores, medians of -2 (-4 to 4), -1 (-3 to 2), and 1 (-1 to 4), respectively, compared to controls, median difference of 0 for all subscales. After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in EE (mean difference = -0.2 [-0.5 to 0.2], p = 0.4) or DP scores (mean difference = -0.2 [-1.8 to 1.5], p = 0.9). There was a significant difference in PA scores (mean difference = 2.2 [0.1 to 4.3], p = 0.04). Most students felt the program positively impacted their rotation (39/48) and decreased stress (28/48). Students felt that the program provided career guidance and positively impacted their personal and professional development. The majority (34/37) of mentors enjoyed participating. Qualitative analysis revealed five major themes: relationship building, different perspective, knowledge sharing, personal fulfillment, and self-reflection.ConclusionWe found an increased sense of personal accomplishment after implementation of a mentorship program. Both mentors and mentees viewed the program positively and perceived multiple benefits.
| S-EPMC6637010 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMentoring has become a prevalent educational strategy in medical education, with various aims. Published reviews of mentoring report very little on group-based mentorship programs. The aim of this systematic review was to identify group-based mentorship programs for undergraduate medical students and describe their aims, structures, contents and program evaluations. Based on the findings of this review, the authors provide recommendations for the organization and assessment of such programs.MethodsA systematic review was conducted, according to PRISMA guidelines, and using the databases Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and ERIC up to July 2019. Eight hundred abstracts were retrieved and 20 studies included. Quality assessment of the quantitative studies was done using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).ResultsThe 20 included studies describe 17 different group mentorship programs for undergraduate medical students in seven countries. The programs were differently structured and used a variety of methods to achieve aims related to professional development and evaluation approaches. Most of the studies used a single-group cross-sectional design conducted at a single institution. Despite the modest quality, the evaluation data are remarkably supportive of mentoring medical students in groups.DiscussionGroup mentoring holds great potential for undergraduate medical education. However, the scientific literature on this genre is sparse. The findings indicate that group mentorship programs benefit from being longitudinal and mandatory. Ideally, they should provide opportunities throughout undergraduate medical education for regular meetings where discussions and personal reflection occur in a supportive environment.
| S-EPMC7550430 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The implementation of competency-based intrinsic roles in undergraduate medical education remains a challenge. Faculties in transition need to be provided with generalizable curricular data in order to facilitate orientation on curricular roles' representation and to decide on steps of curriculum development. Explicit and implicit representation of objectives and multi-site agreement can be viewed as status indicators for the adoption of roles. Our aim was to develop a pragmatic cross-locational approach to capture roles' developmental status in an overview and prioritize strategic recommendations. METHODS:Based on the mapping data from six German medical faculties, the relationship between explicit and implicit curricular representation of role' objectives (weighting) and extent of programs' consent (agreement) was calculated. Data was visualized in a role-specific Matrix Map to analyse roles' implicit-explicit relation and risk-value potential. The matrix was combined with Roger's stages of innovation diffusion for differentiated interpretation of the developmental role status. RESULTS:Entangling multi-site agreement and curricular weighting, the 4-Field-Matrix allows to assess objectives based on their current localization in a quadrant: "Disregard" (lower left) and "Progress" quadrant (upper left) reveal the diffusion period; "Potential" (lower right) and "Emphasis" quadrant (upper right) indicate the adoption period. The role patterns differ in curricular representation, progression and clarity: (1) Scholar: explicit/implicit - scattered across the matrix; most explicit objectives in "Progress". (2) Health Advocate: explicit - primarily in "Emphasis"; only role in which the explicit representation significantly exceeds the implicit. (3) Collaborator: explicit - mainly "Potential"; implicit - "Progress" or "Emphasis". (4) Professional: explicit - primarily "Potential" but also "Emphasis"; implicit - "Progress" and "Emphasis"; appears better adopted but scattered in weighting; high hidden curricula. (5) Manager: explicit and implicit - exclusively in "Potential", without signs of development. Role patterns correspond to evidences from literature. Exemplified with roles, quadrant-specific strategies and measures are suggested. Framework reviewers may gain information for discussion of critical content. CONCLUSION:The Matrix Map enables to catch intuitively the status of intrinsic roles' profiles regarding role pattern, implicit-explicit relation and programs agreement. Thus, interpretation and informed discussions are fostered. Further target-oriented analyses and strategic developments can be conducted to enhance transparency and resource-efficiency.
| S-EPMC6598229 | biostudies-literature