Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Cardiac Surgical Education in North America

Students at a crossroad: A cross-sectional survey gauging the impact of COVID-19 on medical and biomedical graduates in the United States and Sweden

Graduate programs in medicine and biomedical sciences have been severely impacted by the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic over the last 2 years. Following 2 years since beginning of the pandemic, data on student support, educational and academic performance as well as sentiment on changes to educational programs are starting to emerge. We performed and compared results of two cross-sectional surveys of Swedish and U.S.-based medical and biomedical graduate students on how the pandemic has affected their studies, research productivity and career trajectory. Students were also asked to assess support provided by the university and supervisors. The surveys also captured student demographics and a range of other factors, such as pressures brought on by caretaking and financial responsibilities. We analyzed answers from 264 and 106 students attending graduate programs in universities in Sweden and the United States, respectively. U.S.-based students faced more severe restrictions on their research program compared to students in Sweden, reporting more delays in productivity, scientific output and graduation, and increased worries about their career trajectory. Swedish students had more caretaking responsibilities, although these did not cause any delays in graduation. While support by universities and supervisors was comparable between the countries, financial worries and mental health concerns were particularly prominent in the U.S. cohort. Student performance and outlook was hugely dependent on the breadth of the restrictions and the available support. Besides the governmental and university-led approach to counter the pandemic, societal differences also played a role in how well students were handling effects of the pandemic.

Critical care medicine training in the age of COVID-19

CONTEXT

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the largest disruption to graduate medical education in modern history. The danger associated with SARS-CoV-2 necessitated a paradigm shift regarding the fundamental approach to the education of medical residents and fellows. Whereas prior work has examined the effect of the pandemic on residents' experiences during training, the effect of the pandemic on academic performance of critical care medicine (CCM) fellows is not well understood.

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the relationship between CCM fellow's lived experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic and performance on in-training examinations.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study consisted of a quantitative retrospective analysis of critical care fellows' in-training examination scores and a qualitative, interview-based phenomenological examination of fellows' experiences during the pandemic while training in a single large academic hospital in the American Midwest. Quantitative: Prepandemic (2019 and 2020) and intrapandemic (2021 and 2022) in-training examination scores were analyzed utilizing an independent samples t test to determine whether a significant change occurred during the pandemic. Qualitative: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with CCM fellows exploring their lived experiences during the pandemic and their perception of the effect on their academic performance. Transcribed interviews were analyzed for thematic patterns. These themes were coded and categorized, and subcategories were developed as indicated during the analysis. The identified codes were then analyzed for thematic connections and apparent patterns. Relationships between themes and categories were analyzed. This process was continued until a coherent picture could be assembled from the data to answer the research questions. Analysis was performed from a phenomenological perspective with an emphasis on interpretation of the data from the participants' perspectives.

RESULTS

Quantitative: Fifty-one in-training examination scores from 2019 to 2022 were obtained for analysis. Scores from 2019 to 2020 were grouped as prepandemic scores, while scores from 2021 to 2022 were grouped as intrapandemic scores. Twenty-four prepandemic and 27 intrapandemic scores were included in the final analysis. A significant difference was found between mean total prepandemic and intrapandemic in-service examination scores (t 49=2.64, p=0.01), with mean intrapandemic scores being 4.5 points lower than prepandemic scores (95 % CI, 1.08-7.92). Qualitative: Interviews were conducted with eight CCM fellows. Thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews revealed three main themes: psychosocial/emotional effects, effects on training, and effects on health. The factors that most effected participants' perceptions of their training were burnout, isolation, increased workload, decreased bedside teaching, decreased formal academic training opportunities, decreased procedural experience, a lack of an external reference point for normal training in CCM, fear of spreading COVID-19, and neglect of personal health during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

In-training examination scores decreased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic for CCM fellows in this study. The fellows in this study reported perceived effects of the pandemic on their psychosocial/emotional well-being, medical training, and health.

A Canadian survey of residency applicants' and interviewers' perceptions of the 2021 CaRMS R1 virtual interviews

BACKGROUND

All Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS) R1 interviews were conducted virtually for the first time in 2021. We explored the facilitators, barriers, and implications of the virtual interview process for the CaRMS R1 match and provide recommendations for improvement.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of CaRMS R1 residency applicants and interviewers across Canada in 2021. Surveys were distributed by email to the interviewers, and by email, social media, or newsletter to the applicants. Inductive thematic analysis was used for open-ended items. Recommendations were provided as frequencies to demonstrate strength. Close-ended items were described and compared across groups using Chi-Square Fisher's Exact tests.

RESULTS

A total of 127 applicants and 400 interviewers, including 127 program directors, responded to the survey. 193/380 (50.8%) interviewers and 90/118 (76.3%) applicants preferred virtual over in-person interview formats. Facilitators of the virtual interview format included cost and time savings, ease of scheduling, reduced environmental impact, greater equity, less stress, greater reach and participation, and safety. Barriers of the virtual interview format included reduced informal conversations, limited ability for applicants to explore programs at different locations, limited ability for programs to assess applicants' interest, technological issues, concern for interview integrity, limited non-verbal communication, and reduced networking. The most helpful media for applicants to learn about residency programs were program websites, the CaRMS/AFMC websites, and recruitment videos. Additionally, panel interviews were preferred by applicants for their ability to showcase themselves and build connections with multiple interviewers. Respondents provided recommendations regarding: (1) dissemination of program information, (2) the use of technology, and (3) the virtual interview format.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceptions of 2021 CaRMS R1 virtual interviews were favourable among applicants and interviewers. Recommendations from this study can help improve future iterations of virtual interviews.