Dataset Information

Disrupting Faculty-on-Faculty Bullying in Academic Medicine: An Innovative Workshop.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Bullying, a severe form of mistreatment, occurs when an individual in an authority position intentionally imposes negative persistent behaviors on a target. In academic medicine, bullying is used to impede the target's professional growth. While there is abundant literature on how to disrupt other forms of mistreatment, the literature related to bullying among academic medical faculty members is scarce.

Methods

We developed an interactive workshop on disrupting faculty-on-faculty bullying in academic medicine, with a focus on gender-based bullying, following Kern's model of curriculum development. The workshop consisted of three didactics on the scope of bullying in academic medicine: identifying bullying behaviors, learning strategies to mitigate bullying, and understanding what constitutes comprehensive antibullying policies. The workshop also included three small-group activities to reinforce learned concepts.

Results

Eighty-seven faculty attended one of three workshops held over a 6-month period. We received 24 completed evaluations for a 28% rate of return. Most participants rated workshop activities as being well taught and of great value. Many respondents commented that after participating in the workshop, they realized they had likely experienced or witnessed bullying in their careers and that mitigating bullying required effort at multiple levels (individual, institutional, national).

Discussion

This workshop fills a need in academic medicine through addressing how faculty members and institutions can help themselves and others to disrupt bullying. We will continue to disseminate this workshop at national conferences and at individual institutions. This resource will allow other educators to offer the workshop at their home institutions.

SUBMITTER: Iyer MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10545817 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Disrupting Faculty-on-Faculty Bullying in Academic Medicine: An Innovative Workshop.

Iyer Maya S MS Way David P DP MacDowell Doug D Overholser Barbara B Jagsi Reshma R Spector Nancy D ND

MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources 20231003

<h4>Introduction</h4>Bullying, a severe form of mistreatment, occurs when an individual in an authority position intentionally imposes negative persistent behaviors on a target. In academic medicine, bullying is used to impede the target's professional growth. While there is abundant literature on how to disrupt other forms of mistreatment, the literature related to bullying among academic medical faculty members is scarce.<h4>Methods</h4>We developed an interactive workshop on disrupting facult ...[more]

PMID: 37795259

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePoor retention may be associated with lack of faculty diversity in academic medicine.ObjectiveTo examine differences in faculty retention by gender, degree type, and race and ethnicity using data from US medical schools.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study analyzed data from 155 medical schools for 1978 to 2021, which were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Retention rates were calculated by gender, race and ethnicity, and degree type. Time to attrition was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the differences in retention by gender and race. Data were analyzed from March 2021 to November 2022.Main outcomes and measuresThe duration of continuous employment in academic medicine and variations in retention based on gender, race, ethnicity, and terminal degree.ResultsAmong 390 766 faculty members (232 829 [59.6%] men; 1190 American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander [0.3%]; 72 490 Asian [18.6%]; 14 920 Black [3.8%]; 20 345 Hispanic, Latino, of Spanish origin, or multirace Hispanic [5.2%]; 251 670 non-Hispanic White [64.4%] participants; and 30 151 [7.7%] other race), 259 628 (66.4%) had MD or MD-equivalent terminal degrees. Women left academic medicine a median of 1 year earlier (median retention, 8.33 years; 95% CI, 8.18-8.41 years) than men (median retention, 9.35 years; 95% CI, 9.25-9.42 years). Compared with White faculty (median retention, 9.91 years; 95% CI, 9.83-9.92 years), multiracial and faculty of other races had the lowest retention (median retention, 5.42 years; 95% CI, 5.33-5.55 years), followed by Alaska Native, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (median retention, 6.00 years; 95% CI, 5.62-6.62 years), Black (median retention, 7.78 years; 95% CI, 7.50-8.00 years), Asian (median retention, 8.00 years; 95% CI, 8.00-8.11 years) and Hispanic faculty (median retention, 9.00 years; 95% CI, 8.75-9.16 years). Women faculty in the 1970s were 20% more likely than men to leave academia, whereas women in the 2010s had no greater risk of leaving, mainly due to a decline in retention of men.Conclusions and relevanceGender differences in faculty retention have decreased in the most recent decade; however, men had lower retention compared with earlier cohorts. In this study, faculty who were underrepresented in medicine left academic medicine a median of 1 to 4 years earlier than White faculty. Greater attrition among men and women for recent cohorts suggests that enhanced retention efforts are imperative to maintain an experienced and diverse faculty.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency physicians require competence performing critical and routine procedures. The clinical practice of emergency medicine (EM) alone may be insufficient for the acquisition and maintenance of skills. Prior studies suggest the presence of trainees in academic settings and/or the low frequency of procedures increase the risk of skills attrition among faculty. We sought to develop a valid needs assessment survey to inform a faculty procedural skills (FPS) maintenance curriculum.MethodsA Web-based FPS survey was designed to assess experiences performing procedures, self-reported confidence with procedures, and learning preferences for skills maintenance. The survey was administered at a large academic department of EM. Responses were analyzed to determine survey construct validity, faculty attitudes about procedural attrition, and preferred learning methods.ResultsAmong EM faculty, confidence was significantly higher for common versus uncommon procedures (p < 0.001). EM faculty respondents reported significantly greater confidence than pediatric EM (PEM) faculty for both common adult procedures (EM mean = 3.7 [±0.3], PEM = 3.0 [±0.4], p < 0.001), and uncommon adult procedures (EM = 2.7 [±0.4], PEM = 2.1 [±0.5], p < 0.001). PEM faculty reported significantly greater confidence with pediatric procedures than EM faculty (PEM mean [±SD] = 3.5 [±0.8], EM = 2.2 [±0.8], p < 0.001). Nearly all faculty (93% [52/56]) agreed that procedural attrition is a concerning problem, and 80% (44/56) had personally experienced it. The most preferred learning methods were task trainers and simulation. Faculty preferred learning environments with faculty peers (91%) over mixed groups with trainees (50%).ConclusionsSignificant differences in procedural skills confidence between common and uncommon procedures, and between EM and PEM faculty, indicate that the FPS survey displayed appropriate construct validity. The finding that skills attrition is prevalent among EM and PEM faculty highlights the need for skill maintenance programming, preferably in peer groups employing task trainers and simulation.

Project description:IntroductionDespite the increasing diversity of individuals entering medicine, physicians from racial and sexual minority groups continue to experience bias and discrimination in the workplace. The objective of this study was to determine the current experiences and perceptions of discrimination on the basis of race and sexual orientation among academic emergency medicine (EM) faculty.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of EM faculty across six programs. Survey items included the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale adapted for race and sexual orientation, and the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination. Group comparisons were made using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and relationships between race or sexual orientation, and we evaluated physicians' experiences using correlation analyses.ResultsA total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Non-White physicians reported higher mean racial OGDW scores than their White counterparts (13.4 vs 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference, -7.7 - -2.9). Non-White EM faculty were also more likely to report having experienced discriminatory treatment based on race than were White EM faculty (48.0% vs 12.6%; CI for difference, 16.6% - 54.2%), although both groups were equally likely to report having observed race-based discrimination of another physician. EM faculty who identified as sexual minorities reported higher mean sexual minority OGDW scores than their heterosexual counterparts (11.1 vs 7.1; 95% CI for difference, -7.3 - -0.6). There were no significant differences between sexual minority and heterosexual faculty in their reports of experiencing or observing discrimination based on sexual orientation.ConclusionEM faculty from racial and sexual minority groups perceived more discrimination based on race or sexual orientation in their workplace than their majority counterparts. EM faculty regardless of race or sexual orientation were similar in their observations of discriminatory treatment of another physician based on race or sexual orientation.

Dataset Information

Disrupting Faculty-on-Faculty Bullying in Academic Medicine: An Innovative Workshop.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Disrupting Faculty-on-Faculty Bullying in Academic Medicine: An Innovative Workshop.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets