“在工作中获得支持‘是不同的’和重要的”:与医学院教员的虚拟同伴讨论组的定性研究。

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000005916
Chantal M L R Brazeau, Manasa S Ayyala, Ping-Hsin Chen, Margaret Swarbrick
{"title":"“在工作中获得支持‘是不同的’和重要的”:与医学院教员的虚拟同伴讨论组的定性研究。","authors":"Chantal M L R Brazeau, Manasa S Ayyala, Ping-Hsin Chen, Margaret Swarbrick","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In response to the need to support health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, an innovative, peer-led discussion group program for medical school faculty, called CIRCLE (Colleague Involved in Reaching Colleagues through Listening and Empathy), was developed at Rutgers Health. This article describes results of a qualitative analysis of the participants' experiences, explores virtual communication platform use during this peer support program, and identifies the program's beneficial elements.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>CIRCLE was inaugurated in October 2020 at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School using evidence-informed topics. The inaugural CIRCLE peer-led discussion groups included 50 physicians who met twice monthly in groups of 5 to 8 between October 2020 and April 2021. Deidentified transcript data were iteratively reviewed using conventional content analysis, including familiarization, thematic framework creation, indexing, charting, mapping, and interpretation. Themes were grouped into 4 conceptual framework categories based on social support theory in context of work-related stress: emotional, appraisal, informational, and instrumental support.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Themes emerged based on the framework: emotional support (connecting on a deeper level, importance of support at work, COVID-19 made virtual connections needed and relevant), appraisal support (feeling \"not alone,\" safe space to connect and share), informational support (sharing self-care strategies), and instrumental support (incentives to join are helpful but connection leads to engagement, some structure but \"not too much\" is important, virtual modalities are convenient and conducive to connection).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Benefits of peer discussion groups include deeper connections at work, reduced isolation, safe sharing, and exchange of information on self-care. Connection and balancing structure and autonomy were important to engagement. Virtual modalities were viewed as feasible, convenient, and conducive to connection. This article highlights the benefits and convenience of virtual peer-led discussion groups for medical school clinical faculty and provides evidence for content development of these programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":"100 4","pages":"459-465"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Having Support at Work 'Is Different' and Important\\\": A Qualitative Study of Virtual Peer Discussion Groups With Medical School Faculty.\",\"authors\":\"Chantal M L R Brazeau, Manasa S Ayyala, Ping-Hsin Chen, Margaret Swarbrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005916\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In response to the need to support health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, an innovative, peer-led discussion group program for medical school faculty, called CIRCLE (Colleague Involved in Reaching Colleagues through Listening and Empathy), was developed at Rutgers Health. This article describes results of a qualitative analysis of the participants' experiences, explores virtual communication platform use during this peer support program, and identifies the program's beneficial elements.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>CIRCLE was inaugurated in October 2020 at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School using evidence-informed topics. The inaugural CIRCLE peer-led discussion groups included 50 physicians who met twice monthly in groups of 5 to 8 between October 2020 and April 2021. Deidentified transcript data were iteratively reviewed using conventional content analysis, including familiarization, thematic framework creation, indexing, charting, mapping, and interpretation. Themes were grouped into 4 conceptual framework categories based on social support theory in context of work-related stress: emotional, appraisal, informational, and instrumental support.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Themes emerged based on the framework: emotional support (connecting on a deeper level, importance of support at work, COVID-19 made virtual connections needed and relevant), appraisal support (feeling \\\"not alone,\\\" safe space to connect and share), informational support (sharing self-care strategies), and instrumental support (incentives to join are helpful but connection leads to engagement, some structure but \\\"not too much\\\" is important, virtual modalities are convenient and conducive to connection).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Benefits of peer discussion groups include deeper connections at work, reduced isolation, safe sharing, and exchange of information on self-care. Connection and balancing structure and autonomy were important to engagement. Virtual modalities were viewed as feasible, convenient, and conducive to connection. This article highlights the benefits and convenience of virtual peer-led discussion groups for medical school clinical faculty and provides evidence for content development of these programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"volume\":\"100 4\",\"pages\":\"459-465\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005916\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005916","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为了响应在COVID-19大流行期间支持医疗保健专业人员的需求,罗格斯大学健康学院为医学院教师开发了一个创新的、由同行主导的讨论小组项目,名为CIRCLE(同事参与通过倾听和同理心与同事接触)。本文描述了参与者体验的定性分析结果,探讨了在同伴支持计划中虚拟交流平台的使用,并确定了该计划的有益因素。方法:CIRCLE于2020年10月在罗格斯大学新泽西医学院和罗格斯大学罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊医学院成立,采用循证主题。首届CIRCLE同行领导的讨论小组包括50名医生,他们在2020年10月至2021年4月期间每月召开两次会议,每组5至8人。使用传统的内容分析,包括熟悉性、主题框架创建、索引、制图、制图和解释,反复审查未识别的转录数据。基于工作压力背景下的社会支持理论,将主题分为4个概念框架类别:情感支持、评价支持、信息支持和工具支持。结果:基于该框架出现的主题:情感支持(更深层次的联系,工作中支持的重要性,COVID-19使虚拟联系变得必要和相关),评估支持(感觉“不孤单”,有安全的联系和分享空间),信息支持(分享自我保健策略),以及工具性支持(加入的激励是有帮助的,但联系会导致参与,一些结构但“不要太多”很重要,虚拟模式方便且有利于联系)。结论:同伴讨论小组的好处包括加深工作中的联系、减少孤立、安全分享和交换自我保健信息。联系、平衡结构和自主性对参与很重要。虚拟模式被认为是可行的,方便的,有利于连接。本文强调了为医学院临床教师提供虚拟同行引导讨论组的好处和便利性,并为这些程序的内容开发提供了证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"Having Support at Work 'Is Different' and Important": A Qualitative Study of Virtual Peer Discussion Groups With Medical School Faculty.

Purpose: In response to the need to support health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, an innovative, peer-led discussion group program for medical school faculty, called CIRCLE (Colleague Involved in Reaching Colleagues through Listening and Empathy), was developed at Rutgers Health. This article describes results of a qualitative analysis of the participants' experiences, explores virtual communication platform use during this peer support program, and identifies the program's beneficial elements.

Method: CIRCLE was inaugurated in October 2020 at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School using evidence-informed topics. The inaugural CIRCLE peer-led discussion groups included 50 physicians who met twice monthly in groups of 5 to 8 between October 2020 and April 2021. Deidentified transcript data were iteratively reviewed using conventional content analysis, including familiarization, thematic framework creation, indexing, charting, mapping, and interpretation. Themes were grouped into 4 conceptual framework categories based on social support theory in context of work-related stress: emotional, appraisal, informational, and instrumental support.

Results: Themes emerged based on the framework: emotional support (connecting on a deeper level, importance of support at work, COVID-19 made virtual connections needed and relevant), appraisal support (feeling "not alone," safe space to connect and share), informational support (sharing self-care strategies), and instrumental support (incentives to join are helpful but connection leads to engagement, some structure but "not too much" is important, virtual modalities are convenient and conducive to connection).

Conclusions: Benefits of peer discussion groups include deeper connections at work, reduced isolation, safe sharing, and exchange of information on self-care. Connection and balancing structure and autonomy were important to engagement. Virtual modalities were viewed as feasible, convenient, and conducive to connection. This article highlights the benefits and convenience of virtual peer-led discussion groups for medical school clinical faculty and provides evidence for content development of these programs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信