Assuring the Groundwork for Success: Mentorship, Sponsorship, and Allyship for Practicing Anesthesiologists.

The challenges facing the health care industry in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic world are numerous, jeopardizing wellness, and performance. Maintaining engagement and fulfillment of anesthesiologists in their work is now a critical issue in various practice settings: academic, private practice, and corporate medicine. In this article, we offer insights on how mentorship, sponsorship, and allyship are important in the advancement of the anesthesiology workforce including women and underrepresented minorities inclusive of race, gender, and disability. Mentorship, sponsorship, and allyship require a framework that intentionally addresses the programmatic structures needed to optimize the environment for increasing women, underrepresented minorities, and other diverse groups. These 3 distinct yet interrelated concepts are defined with a discussion on the value of implementation. In addition, the concept of "belonging" and its importance in enhancing the culture in anesthesiology is explored. We believe that part of the solution to wellness, recruitment and retention and improved job satisfaction of clinicians is having an environment where mentorship, sponsorship, and allyship are foundational.

Roadmap: one anesthesiology department's strategic approach to COVID-19.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The COVID-19 pandemic has driven transformation in every aspect of the healthcare delivery system. The unpredictable onset and magnitude of COVID-19 infections resulted in wide gaps in preparedness for healthcare systems. The development of protocols to address both scarcity of resources and staff protection continues to be essential for risk mitigation. RECENT FINDINGS: The northeast region of the United States had a rapid early surge of COVID-19 infections leading to the exhaustion of critical care capacity. In addition, northeastern hospitals experienced decrease in elective surgical interventions, including organ transplantation. Limited availability of COVID-19 testing and personal protective equipment further fueled the pandemic. This commentary highlights a comprehensive innovative approach to addressing the operating room and hospital demands, as well as the shortages in resources and staffing during the pandemic. SUMMARY: The VCU Department of Anesthesiology operated at 40% of its regular operating room volume throughout the COVID-19 pandemic because of the increased demand from emergency cases. The delay in the peak surge allowed Virginia Commonwealth University, Department of Anesthesiology to develop a comprehensive infrastructure resulting in resulting is maximal workforce risk mitigation.

Workplace discrimination: experiences of practicing physicians.

BACKGROUND: In response to a growing concern regarding physician discrimination in the workplace, this study was developed to: (1) describe the types of discrimination that exist for the practicing physician and (2) determine which groups of physicians are more likely to experience the various forms of discrimination. METHODS: Surveys were mailed to 1930 practicing physicians in Massachusetts. Participants were asked if they had encountered discrimination, how significant the discrimination was against a specific group, the frequency of personal discrimination, and the type of discrimination. Factor analysis identified four types of discrimination: career advancement, punitive behaviors, practice barriers and hiring barriers. RESULTS: A total of 445 responses were received (a 24% response rate). Sixty-three percent of responding physicians had experienced some form of discrimination. Respondents were women (46%), racial/ethnic minorities (42%) and international medical graduates (IMGs) (40%). In addition, 26% of those classified as white were also IMGs. Over 60% of respondents believed discrimination against IMGs was very or somewhat significant. Almost 27% of males acknowledged that gender bias against females was very or somewhat significant. IMGs were more likely to indicate that discrimination against IMGs was significant in their current organization. Of U.S. medical graduates (USMGs) 44% reported that discrimination against IMGs in their current organization was significant. Nonwhites were more likely to report that discrimination based on race/ethnicity was significant. Nearly 29% of white respondents also believed that such discrimination was very or somewhat significant. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians practicing in academic, research, and private practice sectors experience discrimination based on gender, ethnic/racial, and IMG status.