Publications by Year: 2017

OBJECTIVE: To describe various work models for obstetrics and gynecology global health faculty affiliated with academic medical centers and to identify barriers and opportunities for pursuing global health work.

METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted in 2016 among obstetrics and gynecology faculty and leaders from seven academic medical institutions in Boston, Massachusetts. Global health faculty members were invited to complete an online survey about their work models and to participate in semistructured interviews about barriers and facilitators of these models. Department chairs and residency directors were asked to participate in interviews.

RESULTS: The survey response rate among faculty was 65.6% (21/32), of which 76.2% (16/21) completed an interview. Five department leaders (45.5% [5/11]) participated in an interview. Faculty described a range of work models with varied time and compensation, but only one third reported contracted time for global health work. The most common barriers to global health work were financial constraints, time limitations, lack of mentorship, need for specialized training, and maintenance of clinical skills. Career satisfaction, creating value for the obstetrics and gynecology department, and work model flexibility were the most important facilitators of sustainable global health careers.

CONCLUSION: The study identified challenges and opportunities to creating flexible and sustainable work models for academic obstetrics and gynecology clinicians engaged in global health work. Additional research and innovation are needed to identify work models that allow for sustainable careers in global women's health. There are opportunities to create professional standards and models for academic global health work in the obstetrics and gynecology specialty.

BACKGROUND: The improvement of existing medical training programmes in resource-constrained settings is seen as key to addressing the challenge of retaining medical graduates trained at considerable cost both in-country and abroad. In Botswana, the establishment of the national Medical Internship Training Programme (MIT) in 2014 was a first step in efforts to promote retention through the expansion and standardization of internship training, but MIT faces a major challenge related to variability between incoming trainees due to factors such as their completion of undergraduate medical training in different settings. To address this challenge, in August 2016 we piloted a bridging programme for foreign and locally trained medical graduates that aimed to facilitate their transition into internship training. This study aimed to describe the programme and evaluate its impact on the participants' self-rated perceptions of their knowledge, experience, clinical skills, and familiarity with Botswana's healthcare system.

METHODS: We conducted a national, intensive, two-week programme designed to facilitate the transition from medical student to intern and to prepare all incoming interns for their work in Botswana's health system. Participants included all interns entering in August 2016. Formats included lectures, workshops, simulations, discussions, and reflection-oriented activities. The Kellogg Foundation Outcomes Logic Model was used to evaluate the programme, and participants self-rated their knowledge, skills, and attitudes across each of the programme objectives on paired questionnaires before and after participation.

RESULTS: 48/54 participants (89%) provided paired data. Participants reported a high degree of satisfaction with the programme (mean 4.2/5). Self-rated preparedness improved after participation (mean 3.2 versus 3.7, p < 0.001), as did confidence across 18/19 knowledge/skill domains, suggesting that participants felt that the programme prepared them for their internship training. Exploratory analysis revealed that 20/25 participants (80%) reporting either no effect or a negative effect following participation had rated themselves "extremely" or "quite" prepared beforehand, suggesting the programme grounded expectations for interns who initially were overconfident. In contrast, no interns who had initially rated themselves "moderately" or "somewhat" prepared reported a decline in their self-rated sense of preparedness. Interns commented on the benefits of learning about roles/responsibilities, interacting with clinicians from Botswana's healthcare sectors, and the sense of community the programme engendered.

CONCLUSIONS: This programme was feasible to implement and was well-received by participants. Overall, participants perceived an enhancement of their knowledge, skills, and expectations about their role in Botswana's health system after completion of the programme. Our results are likely to be of interest to educators dedicated to training, professional transitions, and career pathways in similar settings in the region and beyond.