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

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.

Sedation and Analgesia for Reduction of Pediatric Ileocolic Intussusception.

Importance: Ileocolic intussusception is an important cause of intestinal obstruction in children. Reduction of ileocolic intussusception using air or fluid enema is the standard of care. This likely distressing procedure is usually performed without sedation or analgesia, but practice variation exists. Objective: To characterize the prevalence of opioid analgesia and sedation and assess their association with intestinal perforation and failed reduction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study reviewed medical records of children aged 4 to 48 months with attempted reduction of ileocolic intussusception at 86 pediatric tertiary care institutions in 14 countries from January 2017 to December 2019. Of 3555 eligible medical records, 352 were excluded, and 3203 medical records were eligible. Data were analyzed in August 2022. Exposures: Reduction of ileocolic intussusception. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcomes were opioid analgesia within 120 minutes of reduction based on the therapeutic window of IV morphine and sedation immediately before reduction of intussusception. Results: We included 3203 patients (median [IQR] age, 17 [9-27] months; 2054 of 3203 [64.1%] males). Opioid use was documented in 395 of 3134 patients (12.6%), sedation 334 of 3161 patients (10.6%), and opioids plus sedation in 178 of 3134 patients (5.7%). Perforation was uncommon and occurred in 13 of 3203 patients (0.4%). In the unadjusted analysis, opioids plus sedation (odds ratio [OR], 5.92; 95% CI, 1.28-27.42; P = .02) and a greater number of reduction attempts (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.03-2.11; P = .03) were significantly associated with perforation. In the adjusted analysis, neither of these covariates remained significant. Reductions were successful in 2700 of 3184 attempts (84.8%). In the unadjusted analysis, younger age, no pain assessment at triage, opioids, longer duration of symptoms, hydrostatic enema, and gastrointestinal anomaly were significantly associated with failed reduction. In the adjusted analysis, only younger age (OR, 1.05 per month; 95% CI, 1.03-1.06 per month; P < .001), shorter duration of symptoms (OR, 0.96 per hour; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99 per hour; P = .002), and gastrointestinal anomaly (OR, 6.50; 95% CI, 2.04-20.64; P = .002) remained significant. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of pediatric ileocolic intussusception found that more than two-thirds of patients received neither analgesia nor sedation. Neither was associated with intestinal perforation or failed reduction, challenging the widespread practice of withholding analgesia and sedation for reduction of ileocolic intussusception in children.

Bullying in Academic Medicine: Experiences of Women Physician Leaders.

PURPOSE: Bullying is defined as offenders abusing positions of authority and intentionally targeting individuals through persistent negative behaviors to impede education or career growth. This study sought to estimate the prevalence and nature of bullying experienced by women physician leaders in academic medicine. METHOD: In this survey-based study, 547 physician graduates of an executive women's leadership training program were invited to complete a survey that measured workplace bullying in 2021. Participants were asked whether and when they had been bullied, how it impacted their careers, and remedies for bullying. Descriptive statistics were used to profile mistreatment and bullying experienced by the respondents during their professional careers and the nature of bullying. Content analysis of open-ended comments was used to describe how bullying impacted women physicians and outline recommendations for bullying prevention and mitigation. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 64.7% (354/547). Most women (302/354 [85.3%]) had experienced mistreatment during their careers, with more than half experiencing bullying while an attending physician (198/302 [65.6%]). Many women (187/302 [61.9%]) who screened positive for mistreatment also reported that they had been bullied at work. Of these 187 respondents, 173 (92.5%) experienced bullying from men and 121 (64.7%) reporting bullying from women (effect size = 0.34, P ≤ .001), and 115 (61.5%) reported that bullies were their immediate supervisors. Qualitative findings suggested that bullying harmed individuals' career advancement, mental health, reputation, and relationships with others. Many had to change roles or leave jobs. Participants proposed that initiatives by top-level leaders, clear definitions of bullying behavior, reporting mechanisms, and upstander training for faculty and staff could mitigate bullying. CONCLUSIONS: Most women physician leaders have experienced bullying. These results highlight the need to address bullying in academic medicine so that women can reach their full career potential.

Why Gender-Based Bullying Is Normalized in Academic Medicine: Experiences and Perspectives of Women Physician Leaders.

Background: Bullying has been identified as a problem in the academic medicine. Bullying behaviors persist because organizational cultures have allowed them to become normalized. In academic medicine, women are more likely to be bullied than men. Our purpose was to explain why gender-based bullying persists in academic medicine and identify mitigation strategies. Methods: We interviewed senior faculty women physicians who graduated from the Hedwig van Ameringen Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine® program. We asked participants about their experience with bullying and its consequence on their careers. We also asked about the types of culture they think perpetuates bullying and their thoughts on how best to mitigate bullying. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using Averbuch's Cycle of Academic Bullying as a framework. Results: We sampled 30 women physician leaders for interviews from a pool of 96 volunteers who had screened positive for experiencing bullying. All 30 either experienced or witnessed bullying during their careers. Bullying behaviors included public humiliation, defamation, verbal disparagement, and social isolation. Subjects suffered numerous negative effects from bullying such as stress, burnout, depression, and having to leave the job. Participants believed bullying behaviors persisted due to hierarchical organizational cultures. Barriers to reporting and mitigation were thought to originate from lack of leadership combined with ineffective policies and reporting mechanisms. Conclusions: Dysfunctional hierarchies embedded in organizational cultures within academic medicine have contributed to the normalization of bullying. Committed leadership, focused on implementing comprehensive bullying prevention policies, is needed to promote an inclusive culture in which everyone feels that they belong.

The COVID-19 Elective for Pediatric Residents: Learning About Systems-Based Practice During a Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted pediatric residency programs to adjust the delivery of educational curricula and to update content relevant to the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: In this descriptive paper, we present how we rapidly developed and implemented a COVID-19 pandemic elective for pediatric residents. METHODS: This curriculum was established at a single tertiary care children's hospital in June 2020. We used the ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation) framework to develop a two-week elective (30 hours) consisting of six flexibly scheduled modules. We administered post-elective surveys and exit interviews to solicit feedback to improve the elective and obtain effectiveness of our educational interventions. RESULTS: We developed an asynchronous online COVID-19 Elective for Pediatric Residents. The curriculum modules focus on pathophysiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the disaster management ecosystem, simulation of clinical care, mental health ramifications, and public health consequences. We also include six in-situ experiences (visits to a drive-through COVID-19 testing site, testing laboratory and local public health department, a simulation of a critically ill child, and meetings with emergency managers and social workers) to solidify learning and allow for further reflection. To date, eight participants have taken the elective. All participants strongly agreed on a five-point Likert item survey that the elective enhanced their knowledge in current evidence-based literature for COVID-19, disaster preparedness, hospital response, management of the critically ill child, and mental and public health ramifications. All participants agreed this curriculum was relevant to and will change their practice. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate how a COVID-19 elective for pediatric residents could be quickly developed and implemented. The pilot results show that pediatric trainees value asynchronous learning, supplemented by relevant in-situ experiences. Moreover, these results suggest that this curriculum provides needed disaster response and resiliency education for pediatric residents.