Impact of Faculty Education on the Incidence of Sexual Harassment Experienced by Canadian Medical Students

How medical learners and educators decide what counts as mistreatment: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

The mistreatment or abuse (maltreatment) of medical learners by their peers and supervisors has been documented globally for decades, and there is significant research about the prevalence, sequelae and strategies for intervention. However, there is evidence that learners experience maltreatment as being less clear cut than do researchers, educators and administrators. This definitional ambiguity creates problems for understanding and addressing this issue. The objective of this study was to understand how medical learners and educators make sense of less-than-ideal interactions in the clinical learning environment, and to describe which factors influenced their perception that the encounter constituted maltreatment.

METHODS

Using constructivist grounded theory, we interviewed 16 medical students, 15 residents or fellows, and 18 educators associated with a single medical school (n = 49). Data collection began with the most junior learners, iterating with analysis as we progressed through the project. Constant comparative analysis was used to gather and compare stories of 'definitely', 'maybe' and 'definitely not' maltreatment across a variety of axes including experience level, clinical setting and type of interaction.

RESULTS

Our data show that learners and educators have difficulty classifying their experiences of negative interpersonal interaction, except in the most severe and concrete cases. While there was tremendous variation in the way they categorised similar experiences, there was consistency in the elements drawn upon to make sense of those experiences. Participants interpreted negative interpersonal interactions on an individual basis by considering factors related to the interaction, initiator and recipient.

CONCLUSIONS

Only the most negative behaviour is consistently understood as maltreatment; a complex process of individual sense-making is required to determine the acceptability of each interaction. The differences between how individuals judge these interactions highlight an opportunity for administrative, research and faculty development intervention.

Interventions addressing student bullying in the clinical workplace: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Student bullying in the clinical environment continues to have a substantial impact, despite numerous attempts to rectify the situation. However, there are significant gaps in the literature about interventions to help students, particularly a lack of specific guidance around which to formulate an intervention program likely to be effective. With this narrative review about student bullying interventions in the clinical learning environment, we examine and draw together the available, but patchy, information about 'what works' to inform better practice and further research.

METHODS

We initially followed a PICO approach to obtain and analyse data from 38 articles from seven databases. We then used a general inductive approach to form themes about effective student bullying intervention practice, and potential unintended consequences of some of these, which we further developed into six final themes.

RESULTS

The diverse literature presents difficulties in comparison of intervention efficacy and substantive guidance is sparse and inconsistently reported. The final analytical approach we employed was challenging but useful because it enabled us to reveal the more effective elements of bullying interventions, as well as information about what to avoid: an interventionist and institution need to, together, 1. understand bullying catalysts, 2. address staff needs, 3. have, but not rely on policy or reporting process about behaviour, 4. avoid targeting specific staff groups, but aim for saturation, 5. frame the intervention to encourage good behaviour, not target poor behaviour, and 6. possess specific knowledge and specialised teaching and facilitation skills. We present the themed evidence pragmatically to help practitioners and institutions design an effective program and avoid instigating practices which have now been found to be ineffective or deleterious.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite challenges with the complexity of the literature and in determining a useful approach for analysis and reporting, results are important and ideas about practice useful. These inform a way forward for further, more effective student bullying intervention and research: an active learning approach addressing staff needs, which is non-targeted and positively and skilfully administered. (331w).

Assessment of Programs Aimed to Decrease or Prevent Mistreatment of Medical Trainees

IMPORTANCE

Mistreatment of medical students is pervasive and has negative effects on performance, well-being, and patient care.

OBJECTIVE

To document the published programmatic and curricular attempts to decrease the incidence of mistreatment.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and MedEdPORTAL were searched. Comprehensive searches were run on "mistreatment" and "abuse of medical trainees" on all peer-reviewed publications until November 1, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Citations were reviewed for descriptions of programs to decrease the incidence of mistreatment in a medical school or hospital with program evaluation data. A mistreatment program was defined as an educational effort to reduce the abuse, mistreatment, harassment, or discrimination of trainees. Studies of the incidence of mistreatment without description of a program, references to a mistreatment program without outcome data, or a program that has never been implemented were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Authors independently reviewed all retrieved citations. Articles that any author found to meet inclusion criteria were included in a full-text review. The data extraction form was developed based on the guidelines for Best Evidence in Medical Education. An assessment of the study quality was conducted using a conceptual framework of 6 elements essential to the reporting of experimental studies in medical education.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A descriptive review of the interventions and outcomes is presented along with an analysis of the methodological quality of the studies. A separate review of the MedEdPORTAL mistreatment curricula was conducted.

RESULTS

Of 3347 citations identified, 10 studies met inclusion criteria. Of the programs included in the 10 studies, all were implemented in academic medical centers. Seven programs were in the United States, 1 in Canada, 1 in the United Kingdom, and 1 in Australia. The most common format was a combination of lectures, workshops, and seminars over a variable time period. Overall, quality of included studies was low and only 1 study included a conceptual framework. Outcomes were most often limited to participant survey data. The program outcome evaluations consisted primarily of surveys and reports of mistreatment. All of the included studies evaluated participant satisfaction, which was mostly qualitative. Seven studies also included the frequency of mistreatment reports; either surveys to assess perception of the frequency of mistreatment or the frequency of reports via official reporting channels. Five mistreatment program curricula from MedEdPORTAL were also identified; of these, only 2 presented outcome data.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are very few published programs attempting to address mistreatment of medical trainees. This review identifies a gap in the literature and provides advice for reporting on mistreatment programs.

Harassment and discrimination in medical training: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Harassment and discrimination include a wide range of behaviors that medical trainees perceive as being humiliating, hostile, or abusive. To understand the significance of such mistreatment and to explore potential preventive strategies, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees.

METHOD

In 2011, the authors identified relevant studies by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE, scanning reference lists of relevant studies, and contacting experts. They included studies that reported the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees. Two reviewers independently screened all articles and abstracted study and participant characteristics and study results. The authors assessed the methodological quality in individual studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. They also conducted a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The authors included 57 cross-sectional and 2 cohort studies in their review. The meta-analysis of 51 studies demonstrated that 59.4% of medical trainees had experienced at least one form of harassment or discrimination during their training (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.0%-66.7%). Verbal harassment was the most commonly cited form of harassment (prevalence: 63.0%; 95% CI: 54.8%-71.2%). Consultants were the most commonly cited source of harassment and discrimination, followed by patients or patients' families (34.4% and 21.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates the surprisingly high prevalence of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees that has not declined over time. The authors recommend both drafting policies and promoting cultural change within academic institutions to prevent future abuse.

Sexual harassment in medical education: liability and protection

The prevalence and frequency of sexual harassment in medical education is well documented. On the graduation questionnaire administered by the Association of American Medical Colleges in 2003, 15% of medical students reported experiences of mistreatment during medical school. On items that specifically address sexual mistreatment, over 2% of students reported experiencing gender-based exclusion from training opportunities, and unwanted sexual advances and offensive sexist comments from school personnel. Sexual harassment of medical trainees by faculty supervisors is obviously unethical and may also be illegal under education discrimination laws. In two cases in 1998 and 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that schools may be held liable under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 for the sexual harassment of their students. In 2001, the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education released revised policy guidelines on sexual harassment that reflect the Supreme Court rulings. Medical school administrators should undertake formal assessments of the educational environment in their training programs as a first step toward addressing the problem of sexual harassment. The authors recommend that medical schools implement measures to both prevent and remedy sexual harassment in their training programs. These constructive approaches include applying faculty and student education, establishing a system for notification and response, and creating an institutional structure to provide continuous evaluation of the educational environment.