Search

Purpose: Globally, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought attention to the impact of negative patient outcomes on healthcare providers. In Ghana, obstetric providers regularly face maternal and neonatal mortality, yet limited research has focused on provision of mental health support for these providers. This study sought to understand how obstetric providers viewed seeking mental health support after poor clinical outcomes, with a focus on the role of mental health stigma.Patients and Methods: Participants were 52 obstetric providers (20 obstetrician/gynecologists and 32 midwives) at two tertiary care hospitals in Ghana. Five focus groups, led by a trained facilitator and lasting approximately two hours, were conducted to explore provider experiences and perceptions of support following poor maternal and neonatal outcomes. Discussions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, then analyzed qualitatively using grounded theory methodology.Results: Most participants (84.3%, N=43) were finished with training, and 46.2% (N=24) had been in practice more than 10 years. Emerging themes included pervasive stigma associated with seeking mental health care after experiencing poor clinical outcomes, which was derived from two overlapping dimensions. First, societal-level stigma resulted from a cultural norm to keep emotions hidden, and the perception that psychiatry is equated with severe mental illness. Second, provider-level stigma resulted from the belief that healthcare workers should not have mental health problems, a perception that mental health care is acceptable for patients but not for providers, and a fear about lack of confidentiality. Despite many providers acknowledging negative mental health impacts following poor clinical outcomes, these additive layers of stigma limited their willingness to engage in formal mental health care.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that stigma creates significant barriers to acceptance of mental health support among obstetric providers. Interventions to support providers will need to respect provider concerns without reinforcing the stigma associated with seeking mental health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gender equity is a critical issue in academic medicine. Whether there is equitable access to the prestige and resources of endowed professorships merits evaluation. We investigated this question in obstetrics and gynecology, a field that focuses on the health of women and in which women are much better represented than other specialties of medicine. Materials and Methods: We compiled a list of the top 25 United States departments of obstetrics and gynecology and contacted department chairs (and used department websites) to obtain lists of faculty and their positions. Scopus, department websites, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER were used to collect h-Index, number of publications and citations, graduation year, degrees, gender, and NIH-funding. We conducted a bivariate comparison of endowed professorship attainment by gender using a chi-square test and created a multiple variable regression model. Results: Of the 680 obstetrics and gynecology faculty across 23 departments that had endowed chairs, 64 out of 400 women (16%) and 66 out of 280 men (24%) held endowed chairs (p = 0.01). The multivariable model suggested no independent gender difference in attainment of an endowed chair after adjusting for covariates. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this study is the first to examine gender as a variable in endowed chair allocation in top obstetrics and gynecology academic departments. Our findings suggest a significant gender difference in the allocation of endowed chairs. That difference is driven by gender differences in academic rank, graduation year, publications, and funding. To promote the intraprofessional equity necessary to optimally advance women's health, further research and intervention are necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]