Article

A study of the relational aspects of the culture of academic medicine.

National Initiative of Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine: C-Change, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts 02454-9110, USA.
Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges (Impact Factor: 2.34). 02/2009; 84(1):106-14. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181900efc
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The impact of medical school culture on medical students has been well studied, but little documentation exists regarding how medical faculty experience the culture in which they work. In an ongoing project, the National Initiative on Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine, the authors are investigating how the existing culture of academic medical institutions supports all faculty members' ability to function at their highest potential.
The authors conducted a qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools. Faculty in different career stages and diverse specialties were interviewed regarding their perceptions and experiences in academic medicine. Analysis was inductive and data driven.
Relational aspects of the culture emerged as a central theme for both genders across all career categories. Positive relationships were most evident with patients and learners. Negative relational attributes among faculty and leadership included disconnection, competitive individualism, undervaluing of humanistic qualities, deprecation, disrespect, and the erosion of trust.
The data suggest that serious problems exist in the relational culture and that such problems may affect medical faculty vitality, professionalism, and general productivity and are linked to retention. Efforts to create and support trusting relationships in medical schools might enhance all faculty members' efforts to optimally contribute to the clinical, education, and research missions of academic medicine. Future work will document the outcomes of a five-school collaboration to facilitate change in the culture to support the productivity of all medical faculty.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
105 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Medical teachers report both positive and negative experiences, but these impacts are not well understood. In particular, the experience of faculty in relationship-centered education is unknown. Purposes: We sought to assess the benefits to teachers of the Healer's Art, a popular international medical school elective course. Methods: We performed quantitative and qualitative analyses of course evaluations completed by 2009-10 Healer's Art faculty from 17 schools. Results: Ninety-nine of 117 faculty (84.6%) completed the evaluation. No differences in quantitative responses based on gender, specialty, medical school, or year of graduation were observed. Respondents were likely or very likely to agree that the course was useful, positively impacted clinical work and teaching, and increased overall commitment to teaching. In describing the benefits of teaching in the Healer's Art, faculty emphasized four themes: Personal Response to Medicine, Professional Growth, Greater Connection, and Greater Empathy and Respect for Students. Conclusions: Healer's Art faculty report personal and professional benefits, as well as increased commitment to teaching and to a relationship-centered educational process.
    Teaching and Learning in Medicine 01/2014; 26(2):121-8. · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Academic medical centers strive for clinical excellence with operational efficiency and financial solvency, which requires institutions to retain productive and skillful surgical specialists. Faculty workplace perceptions, overall satisfaction, and intent to leave are relationships that have not been examined previously among US surgeons in academic medicine. We hypothesize that critical factors related to workplace satisfaction and engagement could be identified as important for enhancing institutional retention of academic surgeons.
    Journal of the American College of Surgeons 07/2014; 219(1):31-42.e12. · 4.45 Impact Factor
  • Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 03/2014; 133(3):405e-7e. · 3.33 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
4 Downloads
Available from
Sep 18, 2014