Search

Purpose: Many medical students experience distress during medical school. If matriculating medical students (MMSs) begin training with similar or better mental health than age-similar controls, this would support existing concerns about the negative impact of training on student well-being. The authors compared mental health indicators of MMSs versus those of a probability-based sample of the general U.S. population., Method: In 2012 all MMSs at six U.S. medical schools were invited to participate in a survey during orientation. The research team surveyed a probability-based sample of U.S. individuals using the same questions in 2011. Individuals from the population sample who completed a four-year college degree and matched within the appropriate age strata (< 30, 31-35, 36-40, > 40) were compared with MMSs. Surveys included demographics and validated instruments to measure burnout; depression symptoms; and mental, emotional, physical, and overall of quality of life (QOL)., Results: Demographic characteristics of the 582/938 (62%) responding MMSs were similar to U.S. MMSs. Relative to 546 age-similar college graduates, MMSs had lower rates of burnout (27.3% versus 37.3%, P < .001) and depression symptoms (26.2% versus 42.4%, P < .0001) and higher scores across the four QOL domains assessed relative to controls (all P < .0001). These findings persisted on multivariate analysis after adjusting for age, sex, relationship status, and race/ethnicity., Conclusions: These findings, along with high rates of distress reported in medical students and residents, support concerns that the training process and environment contribute to the deterioration of mental health in developing physicians.

Background: Student participation in service activities during medical school is believed to enhance student professionalism and empathy. Yet, there are no studies that measure medical student empathy levels in relation to service activities., Method: Medical students from four classes (2007-2010) were surveyed at graduation using the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy-Student Version and questions about service activity during medical school. For two classes, empathy scores were also obtained at orientation. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Means comparison tests were performed., Results: Mean empathy scores at graduation were higher for students who participated in service activities compared with those who reported no service (115.18 versus 107.97, P < .001). At orientation, students with no service had lower empathy scores, and those with any service had higher empathy scores., Conclusions: Student empathy and service activities during medical school are related. This may have implications for admissions committees.

Background: Medical student burnout is prevalent, and there has been much discussion about burnout and professionalism in medical education and the clinical learning environment. Yet, few studies have attempted to explore relationships between those issues using validated instruments., Method: Medical students were surveyed at the beginning of their fourth year using the Maslach Burnout Inventory, the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy-Student Version, and the Professionalism Climate Instrument. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, and Spearman correlation analysis was performed., Results: Scores indicative of higher medical student burnout were associated with lower medical student empathy scores and with lower professionalism climate scores observed in medical students, residents, and faculty., Conclusions: Investigators observed relationships between medical student burnout, empathy, and professionalism climate. These findings may have implications for the design of curriculum interventions to promote student well-being and professionalism.

Purpose: To determine whether medical licensing board application questions about the mental or physical health or substance use history of the applicant violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990., Method: Content analysis of 51 allopathic licensing applications (50 states and District of Columbia) was performed at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School in 2005. Questions referencing physical or mental health or substance use were identified by a team of physicians and reviewed and categorized based on the ADA and appropriate case law by legal counsel., Results: Of the 51 applications reviewed, 49 (96%) contained questions pertaining to the physical or mental health or substance use history of the applicant. Thirty-four of the 49 (69%) state medical licensing applications contained at least one "likely impermissible" or "impermissible" item based on the ADA and appropriate case law., Conclusions: Most state medical licensing applications contain questions that ask about the physical or mental health and substance use of physician applicants. Many licensing applications appear to be in violation of the ADA, even 19 years after enactment of the regulation. These questions do not elicit responses by which professional competence can be judged. The presence of these questions on licensing applications may cause physicians to avoid or delay treatment of personal illness.

Background: Mental health problems are frequent in primary care, and there are many barriers to their detection and treatment. Clinical research protocols that include close collaboration between mental health professionals and primary care physicians have been found to be beneficial. This study explores the opinions of community family physicians regarding mental health professionals working directly in the primary care office.Method: Members of the New Jersey Academy of Family Physicians (N = 709) were sent a 25-item questionnaire about collaboration with mental health professionals. Three mailings were sent, with a 62% response rate. The surveys were mailed between May and July 1999.Results: Of family physicians included in the analysis, 13.5% reported having an in-office mental health professional. Of those who did not, 60.2% responded that they would consider having one. Compared with physicians who would not consider having an in-office mental health professional, physicians with a mental health professional and those without an in-office mental health professional but who would consider one were statistically more likely (p < .01) to respond that an in-office mental health professional would result in increased use of mental health services, improved acceptance of referrals to mental health professionals, and improved detection and treatment of mental health problems.Conclusion: Although few family physicians have an in-office mental health professional, many more would consider this arrangement and recognize the potential benefits of such collaboration.