Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- medical education & training (2) (remove)
Publisher
Objectives
To investigate levels of distress, depression, anxiety, stress and perception of their current study situation during the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate dental and medical students.
Design
Observational, cross-sectional study including two consecutive surveys (May and July 2020).
Setting
A large medical school in Germany.
Participants
All first year dental and medical students were invited. 132 participating first year students (44 dental, 88 medical) from the first survey and 150 students (50 dental, 100 medical) from the second were included in our analyses.
Primary and secondary outcome measures
Mental burden (distress thermometer, Patient Health Questionnaire-4, Perceived Stress Scale-4) and self-reported changes in mental health and perception of study situation during the COVID-19 pandemic (self-developed items) were compared. Open-ended questions were analysed by conventional content analyses.
Results
A considerable proportion of students (t1: May 2020: 84.1%; t2: July 2020: 77.3%) reported distress levels above cut-off. In July 2020, dental students reported significantly higher distress scores than medical students (dental: M=7.0, SD=2.3; medical: M=5.7; SD=2.1; p<0.001). More dental than medical students reported mild, moderate and severe levels of anxiety and depression symptoms. The majority stated that their mental health and study motivation had not changed during the pandemic. Logistic regression showed that being a dental student was significantly associated with a higher likelihood for serious worries regarding the study situation during COVID-19 at t1 (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.1 to 14.2). At t2 higher distress was significantly associated with a higher likelihood for experiencing serious worries (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.5). Regarding current concerns related to the pandemic, students most frequently reported difficulties with self-regulated learning (15.2%), study-related worries and uncertainty (14.4%), missing feedback of students and lecturers (11.4%) and lack of practical training (9.8%).
Conclusion
The results suggest that high mental burden and the lack of practical training among medical and dental students is an increasing problem, with a possibly even higher urgency in dental students. Tailored psychological and educational support offers during and after the COVID-19 pandemic might help them as they progress through (medical and) dental school.
Objective
To identify and summarise evaluated interventions aiming to improve the communication of palliative care (PC) and end-of-life (EoL) issues in physicians caring for cancer patients. Such interventions are needed with regard to the aim of an earlier communication of those issues in oncology daily practice, which is associated with a range of benefits for patients and caregivers but is often impeded by physicians’ communication insecurities.
Design
Systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.Data sourcesRelevant publications were systematically searched in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases in September 2020 with an update in July 2021.
Eligibility criteria
We included publications reporting a quantitative evaluation of a communication intervention on one or more PC/EoL issues with a communication-related main outcome. Target group had to be physicians caring for cancer patients non-specialist in PC.
Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent raters extracted intervention characteristics, publication characteristics and publication quality. Results were narratively synthesised.
Results
24 publications reporting 22 interventions were included. 13 publications reported randomised controlled trials. A majority of the interventions addressed one specific PC/EoL issue, most often breaking bad news. Teaching strategies mostly involved role-plays. Target group were mainly oncologists. In addition to self-reported outcome measurements for evaluation, most publications also reported the use of external rating data. All but one publication reported significant intervention effects on at least one outcome parameter. Publication quality was overall moderate.
Conclusions
The empirically tested communication interventions on PC/EoL issues seem to effectively improve physicians’ communication. Future interventions should focus on other issues than breaking bad news, such as preparing for the future. Target group should also be organ-specific oncologists, as all primary caring physicians are responsible for timely communication. Our risk-of-bias assessment revealed some weaknesses, indicating that more high-quality studies for evaluation are needed.
PROSPERO registration number CRD42020191054.