Background: Burnout 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.Methods: This 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.Results: A 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. Conclusion:We 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.
Introduction: The optimal method to train novice learners to perform endotracheal intubation (ETI) is unknown. The study objective was to compare two models: unembalmed cadaver vs simulation manikin. Methods: Fourth-year medical students, stratified by baseline ETI experience, were randomized 1:1 to train on a cadaver or simulation manikin. Students were tested and video recorded on a separate cadaver; two reviewers, blinded to the intervention, assessed the videos. Primary outcome was time to successful ETI, analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Authors also compared percentage of glottic opening (POGO), number of ETI attempts, learner confidence, and satisfaction. Results: Of 97 students randomized, 78 were included in the final analysis. Median time to ETI did not differ significantly (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.7-1.8): cadaver group = 34.5 seconds (interquartile ratio [IQR]: 23.3-55.8) vs manikin group = 35.5 seconds (IQR: 23.8-80.5), with no difference in first-pass success (odds ratio [OR] = 1; 95% CI, 0.1-7.5) or median POGO: 80% cadaver vs 90% manikin (95% CI, -14-34%). Satisfaction was higher for cadavers (median difference = 0.5; p = 0.002; 95% CI, 0-1) as was change in student confidence (median difference = 0.5; p = 0.03; 95% CI, 0-1). Students rating their confidence a 5 (“extremely confident”) demonstrated decreased time to ETI (HR = 4.2; 95% CI, 1.0-17.2). Conclusion: Manikin and cadaver training models for ETI produced similar time to ETI, POGO, and first-pass success. Cadaver training was associated with increased student satisfaction and confidence; subjects with the highest confidence level demonstrated decreased time to ETI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.