Abstract
Background
To better understand how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected surgical trainees' and early-career surgeons' professional and personal experiences, a survey of the membership of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Resident and Associate Society (RAS) and Young Fellows Association (YFA) was performed.
Study Design
An anonymous online survey was disseminated to members of RAS and YFA. Descriptive analyses were performed and factors associated with depression and burnout were examined with univariate and multivariable stepwise logistic regression.
Results
Of the RAS/YFA membership of 21,385, there were 1,160 respondents. The majority of respondents (96%) reported the COVID-19 pandemic having a negative impact on their clinical experience, with 84% of residents reporting a > 50% reduction in operative volume and inability to meet minimum case requirements. Respondents also reported negative impacts on personal wellness. Nearly one-third reported inadequate access to personal protective equipment, and depression and burnout were pervasive (≥21% of respondents reported yes to every screening symptom). On multivariable analysis, female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.54 for depression, OR 1.47 for burnout) and lack of wellness resources (OR 1.55 for depression, OR 1.44 for burnout) predicted depression and burnout. Access to adequate personal protective equipment was protective against burnout (OR 0.52).
Conclusions
These data demonstrate a significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of residents and early-career surgeons. Actionable items from these data include mitigation of burnout and depression through increasing personal protective equipment access and provision of wellness programs, with a particular focus on high-risk groups.
Abbreviations and Acronyms: ACS, American College of Surgeons; FACS, Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; OR, odds ratio; PPE, personal protective equipment; RAS, Resident and Associate Society; YFA, Young Fellow Association
Graphical abstract
Surgical residents, fellows, and early-career surgeons face unique challenges during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, or COVID-19, global pandemic. In the face of rapid disease spread and resource disparities, healthcare systems have been forced to adapt and, in turn, the downstream effects have resulted in restructuring of surgical training, reduction of nonemergency surgical cases, and reassignment of trainees to different clinical rotations. These actions interrupted the standard educational curricula, reduced the number of surgical cases, and limited trainees' ability to meet mandatory graduation requirements established by ACGME and other certifying licensing agencies.1, 2, 3 To overcome the loss of clinical and operative opportunities, many surgical training programs implemented technology-based solutions, such as virtual didactics. These novel adaptations have assisted in the continued education of residents and fellows while maintaining social distancing.4 , 5
Collectively, the stressors of the work environment amidst the COVID-19 pandemic are potential threats to surgeons' own well-being. Ethical decision-making about interactions with and treatment of COVID-19 patients has led to increased anxiety and burnout among physician trainees.6 Many healthcare providers also fear contracting COVID-19 themselves and, more frequently, passing the disease to their loved ones.6 , 7 Exacerbating these stressors is the lack of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), which not only drastically limits trainees' learning opportunities but can aggravate feelings of burnout.2 , 7 Despite the ongoing, unprecedented epidemic and these stressors, surgical residents and fellows are still expected to achieve predetermined clinical and educational milestones.
Ultimately, the new pandemic environment has great potential to affect young surgeons' clinical, educational, and personal experiences. However, there has not been a detailed national assessment of how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected residents' and early-career surgeons' experiences. Previous surveys have not targeted the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) membership and have been limited to a focus on educational effects.8 Therefore, the ACS Resident and Associate Society (RAS) created a COVID-19 Resident Task Force to document and analyze the effects of the pandemic on the lived experiences of its membership and to highlight potential opportunities to inform evidence-based responses and planning around pandemics and national crises of similar magnitude.
Methods
The RAS is a subset of the ACS that provides surgical trainees an avenue for participation in ACS affairs, fosters leadership skills in academic surgery, and provides opportunities for the opinions and concerns of young surgeons and trainees to be heard by ACS leadership. Within RAS, there are resident members (actively in surgical residency or fellowship) and associate members (who are surgeons within 6 years of practice, however, are not yet a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons [FACS]). The Young Fellow Association (YFA) consists of FACS surgeons who are younger than 45 years (“early-career surgeons”) and provides them with representation in the greater ACS organization. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, ACS RAS formed a COVID-19 Resident Task Force in May 2020 to analyze the effects of the pandemic on RAS and YFA membership. This task force was composed of 10 RAS members and 2 YFA members who led composition and dissemination of a survey, as described below, with a specific focus on the following cohorts: residents and fellows and early-career surgeons. The resident cohort was composed entirely of RAS member. The early-career surgeons cohort was composed of associate members in RAS (surgeons who have completed an accredited surgical residency program and have entered surgical practice but are not yet FACS) and members of the YFA. By creating these 2 cohorts, we aimed to identify the experience of surgical trainees vs the experience of young, fully trained surgeons.
To quantitatively assess the lived experience of these cohorts, an anonymous, online survey consisting of 43 questions (for the resident cohort) or 29 questions (for the early-career surgeons cohort) was created and disseminated to the RAS and YFA listservs using SurveyMonkey software. Questions focused on clinical, educational, financial, and personal experiences, and how they might have changed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (eDocument 1). A 5-point Likert scale was used to quantify the effect of the pandemic on these experiences. Residents' and early-career surgeons' degree of depression and burnout was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, which screens for depression using 9 questions,9 and the modified, abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Service Survey for Medical Personnel, which examines emotional exhaustion and depersonalization using 3 questions.10, 11, 12
An invitation was sent to participate in the study by filling out the anonymous online survey via a SurveyMonkey link during the month of July 2020. During a period of 2 weeks, an initial survey was sent out and then 2 reminders were sent to those who had not responded initially. Recipients were notified that completing the survey was considered their consent and that identities could not be linked to the individual respondents, their programs, or their place of employment. The study design was submitted to the American Institutes for Research's IRB and received exempt status. The resulting survey data were aggregated on a secure spreadsheet for ACS administrative use only.
Descriptive analyses were performed of the entire respondent cohort, followed by a stratified analysis by resident or early-career surgeons status. After this, a comparison was made between resident and early-career surgeon responses to assess variations in impact of the pandemic by level of training of the respondent. Lastly, depression and burnout were assessed by standardized questions as mentioned, and factors associated with high number of depression or burnout symptoms were determined. Descriptive statistics were reported with percentages. Univariate analysis was performed with chi-square and Fisher exact tests. To better determine factors predictive of depression and burnout, a multivariable stepwise logistic regression was performed, in addition to univariate analysis, after controlling for covariates identified on the univariate (p < 0.20). Statistical analyses were performed using R software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). All tests were 2-tailed, with significance established at p < 0.05.
Results
Overall, of the membership of 21,385 (13,232 RAS members, 8,153 YFA members), there were 1,160 respondents (40% [n = 465] residents and 60% [n = 695] early-career surgeons), for a combined response rate of 5.4%. Most of the respondents were between the ages of 31 and 40 years (66%); men and women were represented equally (53% men, 47% women); and the majority (60%) identified as Caucasian, followed by 19% Asian, 10% Hispanic/Latino, and 3% African American. Of the 1,160 respondents, 17% were from the Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin), 22% from the Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont), 24% from the South (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, DC, and West Virginia), and 16% were from the West (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming); 21% responded “other” (outside of the US) to the question of region, with the majority (91%) being international, 6% were from Canada, 2% were overseas on military duty, and 1% were unemployed. A majority of respondents (64%) were married, 31% were single, and 5% were divorced. Fewer than 1% identified as LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer [or questioning]) and others (n = 6). Approximately one-half (49%) had children.
Residents: effect of COVID-19 pandemic on clinical experience
Overall, of the 10,991 RAS resident members, there were 465 respondents (Table 1 ), for a response rate of 4.2%. In describing their hospital status of COVID-19 admissions, responses were mixed, with 41% reporting that numbers are still increasing (“uptick” in curve) and 40% reporting that numbers are decreasing. When asked about the status of elective operations at the peak of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority (84%) reported a reduction of at least 50% in nonemergency case volume, and another 19% reported a decrease in emergency case volume (Table 2 ; complete survey responses in eTable 1, eTable 2, eTable 3, eTable 4).
Table 1.
Demographic Characteristics of Resident (Resident and Associate Society) Survey Respondents
| Characteristic | Survey response (n = 465) |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Age | ||
| 20 to 25 y | 3 | 0.6 |
| 26 to 30 y | 170 | 37 |
| 31 to 35 y | 241 | 52 |
| 36 to 40 y | 46 | 10 |
| 40 to 45 y | 5 | 1 |
| Sex, m | 216 | 47 |
| Race | ||
| African American | 16 | 4 |
| Asian | 71 | 16 |
| Caucasian | 300 | 67 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 41 | 9 |
| Other | 20 | 4 |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 29 | 6 |
| Marital status | ||
| Divorced | 7 | 2 |
| Married | 219 | 48 |
| Single | 232 | 51 |
| Have children | 110 | 24 |
| Region | ||
| Midwest | 96 | 21 |
| Northeast | 152 | 33 |
| South | 99 | 21 |
| Western | 72 | 15 |
| Other | 46 | 10 |
| Institutional affiliation | ||
| Military | 9 | 2 |
| Non-university affiliated | 75 | 16 |
| University affiliated | 377 | 81 |
| Other, please specify | 3 | 0.6 |
| Program size | ||
| Fewer than 3 graduating chief residents | 71 | 15 |
| More than 8 graduating chief residents | 52 | 11 |
| 4 to 5 graduating chief residents | 160 | 34 |
| 6 to 8 graduating chief residents | 181 | 39 |
| Trauma center level | ||
| Level I | 337 | 72 |
| Level II | 55 | 12 |
| Level III | 21 | 4 |
| Not accredited as a trauma center | 52 | 11 |
| Program specialty | ||
| Acute care, trauma, and burn | 8 | 2 |
| Bariatric or minimally invasive surgery | 5 | 1 |
| Breast surgery | 2 | 0.4 |
| Cardiothoracic surgery | 6 | 1 |
| Colorectal surgery | 6 | 1 |
| Critical care | 6 | 1 |
| Endocrine surgery | 1 | 0.2 |
| General surgery | 388 | 84 |
| Neurologic surgery | 1 | 0.2 |
| Orthopaedic surgery | 3 | 0.6 |
| Other, please specify | 4 | 1 |
| Otolaryngology | 3 | 0.6 |
| Pediatric surgery | 8 | 2 |
| Plastic and reconstructive surgery | 7 | 2 |
| Surgical oncology or hepatobiliary | 6 | 1 |
| Transplantation surgery | 1 | 0.2 |
| Urology | 2 | 0.4 |
| Vascular surgery | 6 | 1 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others.
Table 2.
Resident (Resident and Associate Society) Responses to Survey Questions about Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical, Educational, and Personal Experience
| Experience | Survey response (n = 465) |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Clinical | ||
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 21 | 4 |
| 26% to 50% | 31 | 7 |
| 51% to 75% | 96 | 18 |
| 76% to 100% | 304 | 65 |
| Do not know | 11 | 2 |
| No change | 12 | 3 |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 111 | 24 |
| 26% to 50% | 92 | 20 |
| 51% to 75% | 61 | 13 |
| 76% to 100% | 17 | 4 |
| Do not know | 39 | 8 |
| No change | 145 | 31 |
| Modification in schedule response to the COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Residents have been completely removed from service | 143 | 31 |
| Residents have been grouped into staggered shifts | 325 | 70 |
| More work is designated to APP | 36 | 8 |
| Less work is designated to APP | 69 | 15 |
| Vacations have been rescinded | 152 | 33 |
| Residents have been deployed to nonsurgical services | 163 | 35 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 333 | 72 |
| No changes have been made | 21 | 4 |
| Modification in case coverage in response to COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| No residents allowed in OR | 5 | 1 |
| More cases are designated to APP | 4 | 1 |
| No residents are allowed in the OR if a patient is known COVID-19-positive | 37 | 8 |
| Residents are allowed in the OR on a case-by-base basis | 86 | 18 |
| Residents are limited in number in the OR | 199 | 43 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 244 | 52 |
| No changes have been made | 112 | 24 |
| Modification in clinical coverage in response to COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| No residents are allowed in clinic | 127 | 27 |
| Clinic appointments are designated to APP | 21 | 4 |
| Residents are limited in number in clinic | 92 | 20 |
| Residents are seeing patients via telemedicine appointments | 113 | 24 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 221 | 48 |
| No changes have been made | 76 | 16 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on didactic educational programs | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 55 | 12 |
| Extreme positive impact | 12 | 3 |
| Negative impact | 213 | 50 |
| No impact | 69 | 15 |
| Positive impact | 98 | 21 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on elective operative experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 247 | 53 |
| Negative impact | 199 | 43 |
| No impact | 17 | 4 |
| Positive impact | 1 | 0.2 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on emergent operative experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 31 | 7 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 194 | 42 |
| No impact | 224 | 48 |
| Positive impact | 11 | 2 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinic experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 80 | 17 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 263 | 57 |
| No impact | 96 | 21 |
| Positive impact | 22 | 5 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on physical health | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 44 | 10 |
| Extreme positive impact | 6 | 1 |
| Negative impact | 174 | 37 |
| No impact | 189 | 41 |
| Positive impact | 52 | 11 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on physical safety | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 48 | 10 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 199 | 43 |
| No impact | 202 | 43 |
| Positive impact | 12 | 3 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on emotional health | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 86 | 18 |
| Extreme positive impact | 6 | 1 |
| Negative impact | 239 | 52 |
| No impact | 111 | 24 |
| Positive impact | 22 | 5 |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 22 | 5 |
| No | 64 | 14 |
| Yes | 379 | 82 |
| Have you performed an operation or an invasive procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient | ||
| I am not sure | 24 | 5 |
| No | 136 | 29 |
| Yes | 305 | 66 |
| Educational | ||
| Educational programs that have been adapted/modified during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Morbidity and mortality conference | 388 | 83 |
| ABSITE preparation | 163 | 35 |
| Grand rounds | 373 | 80 |
| Visiting professors | 291 | 63 |
| Tumor board | 262 | 56 |
| Research conferences | 288 | 62 |
| Simulation training/center accessibility | 256 | 55 |
| Teaching rounds | 219 | 47 |
| Meetings with mentors | 157 | 34 |
| Interview for fellowship and/or jobs | 252 | 54 |
| Training linked to telehealth platforms | 80 | 17 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic operative volume on ability to meet minimum case requirement | ||
| Greatly impacted | 110 | 24 |
| Not impacted | 163 | 35 |
| Slightly impacted | 189 | 41 |
| Impact of COVID-19 on expected progression of operative autonomy | ||
| Do not know | 53 | 12 |
| Moderately | 195 | 42 |
| Not at all | 136 | 29 |
| To a great extent | 78 | 17 |
| Personal | ||
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Clinical competency | 37 | 8 |
| Education | 23 | 5 |
| Ethical considerations | 23 | 5 |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 64 | 14 |
| Spread of infection to family | 172 | 37 |
| Surgical case load | 131 | 28 |
| Have witnessed or been subject to harsh treatment as a result of changes during COVID-19 pandemic | 51 | 11 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 240 | 52 |
| Used wellness or resiliency programs offered by the American College of Surgeons or other professional societies during the COVID-19 pandemic | 60 | 13 |
| Perceived to have adequate personal protective equipment access | 300 | 65 |
| Have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms: | ||
| Depressed mood | 142 | 30 |
| Anxiety | 250 | 54 |
| Change in sleep habits | 174 | 37 |
| Change in appetite | 101 | 22 |
| Lost interest | 144 | 31 |
| Change in weight | 182 | 39 |
| Change in ability to sustain attention | 165 | 36 |
| Emotional exhaustion | 257 | 55 |
| Depersonalization | 180 | 39 |
| Decrease in sense of personal achievement | 209 | 45 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
ABSITE, American Board of Surgery in-Service Training Examination; APP, advanced practice provider; OR, operating room.
A variety of schedule changes were reported by residents (Table 2), with most (70%) reporting being grouped into staggered shifts and several also reporting being completely removed from services (31%), having vacations being rescinded (33%), and being deployed to nonsurgical services to fill medical system needs (35%). Lastly, resident participation in outpatient clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic has been impacted, with more reporting no residents allowed in clinic (27%) or limited number of residents in clinic (chief and senior residents only) (20%). Only 24% report resident participation in virtual/telemedicine clinic.
Overall, the majority of residents reported COVID-19 pandemic response having a negative response of their clinical experience (Table 2). Seventy-four percent of respondents reported a negative or extremely negative impact on their clinic experience. The impact appeared to be greatest, however, on operative volume. Ninety-six percent reported a negative or extremely negative impact on elective operative experience, and nearly one-fourth of residents (24%) reported that the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted their ability to meet ACGME minimum case requirements.
Residents: effect of COVID-19 pandemic on educational experience
Responses to impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on resident education were widely mixed among respondents (Table 2). The majority of respondents (61%) reported a negative or extremely negative impact on their didactic educational programming; however, interestingly, 21% reported a positive or extremely positive impact on their didactic experience. When asked to what degree a resident's institution has used innovative education and training solutions during COVID-19, the majority answered “somewhat” (55%) or “to a great extent” (18%). When asked about specific educational programming that was adapted (eg suspended, transitioned to virtual format, and recorded for viewing later), the majority reported adaptations to morbidity and mortality conference, grand rounds, visiting professorships, tumor board, research conferences, and simulation training and center accessibility.
When asked to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted expected progression of operative autonomy, the majority of residents reported either “to a great extent” (17%) or “moderately” (42%). Sixty percent of residents reported no change on feedback on clinical performance/assessment, and 37% reporting a negative or extremely negative impact.
Residents: effect of COVID-19 pandemic on personal experience and risk perception
Nearly one-half of residents (47%) reported the COVID-19 pandemic having an extremely negative or negative effect on their physical health (Table 2). Similarly, more than one-half of residents (53%) reported COVID-19 pandemic having an extremely negative or negative effect on their sense of physical safety. Lastly, 70% of residents reported a negative or extremely negative impact on mental health.
A majority of residents (82%) reported taking care of a known COVID-19-positive patient, and 66% reported performing an interventional procedure and/or operation on a known COVID-19-positive patient. Residents were asked to cite their biggest concern during the COVID-19 pandemic from the following: education, clinical competency, surgical case volume, ethical considerations, fear of contracting COVID-19, or spread of infection to family. The top 2 cited concerns were spread of infection to family (37%) and surgical case load (28%). When asked whether programs have made arrangements to reduce risk to residents' families, nearly one-half (46%) reported their programs had not, and 32% reported alternative housing or living arrangements.
When asked to what degree a resident's institution has demonstrated sensitivity to specific concerns of residents, 51% reported “somewhat” and 41% reported “to a great extent.” Seventy-nine percent of respondents reported that their program provided COVID-19 testing for employees. However, 34% of residents reported not having adequate access to PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic. A small fraction of respondents (8%) reported that programs asked residents to provide their own PPE.
Residents were asked whether they thought that the type of care and risk of exposure they were being asked to take on was commensurate with their level of training. The majority (80%) reported “yes.” When asked whether they thought that the surgical attending and/or clinical educators were taking on the same level of risk as residents, 44% reported that they thought that their attendings were taking on a decreased level of risk, 40% reported the same level of risk, and only 14% reported an increased level of risk. When asked whether residents thought that their program has treated residents equally compared with attending surgeons during the pandemic, 38% reported unequal treatment, and the majority (57%) reported equal treatment. The vast majority of residents (80%) reported their hospital system had not provided residents with any bonus or “hazard pay.”
Residents were then screened for new or increased symptoms of depression. The results demonstrate a majority of residents had new or increased depression symptoms, with 31% reporting depressed mood, 54% reporting anxiety, 37% reporting change in sleep habits, 22% reporting change in appetite, 31% reporting decreased interest or happiness in activities, 39% reporting weight changes, and 35% reporting difficulty in maintaining attention. Residents were also screened for new or increased symptoms of burnout. Similar to depression, the endorsement of burnout feelings was notable. More than one-half (55%) of residents reported emotional exhaustion, 39% reported depersonalization, and 45% reported decrease in sense of personal accomplishment. Approximately one-half (52%) of residents reported that their program instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 13% reported using wellness or resiliency resources offered by the ACS or other professional societies during the pandemic.
Early-career surgeons: effect of COVID-19 pandemic on clinical experience
Overall, of the 16,257 early-career surgeons (8,104 RAS associate members and 8,153 YFA members), there were 695 respondents (316 RAS associate members, 379 YFA members) (Table 3 ), for a response rate of 4.2%. In terms of the status of COVID-19 admissions, one-half reported admissions are still increasing (50%) and 30% reported decreasing (Table 4 ; complete survey responses in eTables 1 to 4). When asked about the status of elective operations at their peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority reported a reduction of 76% to 100% (38%) in elective case volume or 51% to 75% reduction (19%), with few reporting a decrease in emergent case volume (Table 4). In regard to scheduling changes as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the most common reported changes were vacations being rescinded (29%) and administrative staff or clinical staff being furloughed (29% and 28% respectively). In addition, only 5% reported physicians being fired.
Table 3.
Demographic Characteristics of American College of Surgeons Early-Career Surgeons
| Characteristic | Survey response (n = 695) |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Age | ||
| 26 to 30 y | 10 | 2 |
| 31 to 35 y | 168 | 24 |
| 36 to 40 y | 306 | 45 |
| 40 to 45 y | 202 | 29 |
| Sex, m | 396 | 57 |
| Race | ||
| African American | 14 | 2 |
| Asian | 146 | 22 |
| Caucasian | 383 | 57 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 75 | 11 |
| Other | 59 | 9 |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 18 | 3 |
| Marital status | ||
| Divorced | 27 | 4 |
| Married | 524 | 77 |
| Single | 132 | 19 |
| Have children | 456 | 67 |
| Region | ||
| Midwest | 106 | 15 |
| Northeast | 98 | 14 |
| South | 176 | 25 |
| Western | 113 | 16 |
| Other | 200 | 29 |
| Institution affiliation | ||
| Military | 39 | 6 |
| Non-university affiliated | 251 | 36 |
| University affiliated | 379 | 55 |
| Other, please specify | 25 | 4 |
| Practice specialty | ||
| Acute care, trauma, and burn | 116 | 17 |
| Bariatric or minimally invasive surgery | 33 | 5 |
| Cardiothoracic surgery | 22 | 3 |
| Colorectal surgery | 62 | 9 |
| Critical care | 5 | 1 |
| Endocrine surgery | 7 | 1 |
| General surgery | 207 | 30 |
| Neurologic surgery | 10 | 2 |
| Ophthalmology | 2 | 0.3 |
| Orthopaedic surgery | 11 | 2 |
| Other, please specify | 34 | 5 |
| Otolaryngology | 25 | 4 |
| Pediatric surgery | 28 | 4 |
| Plastic and reconstructive surgery | 21 | 3 |
| Surgical oncology or hepatobiliary | 50 | 7 |
| Transplantation surgery | 12 | 2 |
| Urology | 12 | 2 |
| Vascular surgery | 36 | 5 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others.
Table 4.
American College of Surgeons Early-Career Surgeons' Responses to Survey Questions on Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical and Personal Experience
| Experience | Survey response (n = 695) |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Clinical | ||
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 106 | 15 |
| 26% to 50% | 120 | 17 |
| 51% to 75% | 161 | 23 |
| 76% to 100% | 266 | 38 |
| Do not know | 6 | 1 |
| No change | 35 | 5 |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 192 | 28 |
| 26% to 50% | 124 | 18 |
| 51% to 75% | 62 | 9 |
| 76% to 100% | 10 | 2 |
| Do not know | 34 | 5 |
| No change | 271 | 39 |
| Modification in schedule response to the COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Administrative staff have been fired | 54 | 8 |
| Administrative staff have been furloughed | 200 | 29 |
| Clinical staff (nurse/PCT/MA) have been fired | 47 | 7 |
| Clinical staff (nurse/PCT/MA) have been furloughed | 195 | 28 |
| APP staff have been fired | 16 | 2 |
| APP staff have been furloughed | 83 | 12 |
| Physicians have been fired | 33 | 5 |
| Physicians have been furloughed | 72 | 10 |
| More work is designated to APP | 75 | 11 |
| Less work is designated to APP | 52 | 8 |
| Vacations have been rescinded | 203 | 29 |
| Physicians have been reassigned to nonsurgical services | 181 | 26 |
| No changes have been made | 89 | 13 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 280 | 40 |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 45 | 6 |
| No | 180 | 26 |
| Yes | 468 | 68 |
| Have you performed an operation or an invasive procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 43 | 6 |
| No | 292 | 42 |
| Yes | 357 | 52 |
| Personal | ||
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Administrative issues | 25 | 4 |
| Ethical considerations | 30 | 4 |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 100 | 14 |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependent | 54 | 8 |
| Lost compensation | 46 | 7 |
| Spread of infection to family | 279 | 40 |
| Surgical case load/practice concern | 126 | 18 |
| Decrease in compensation due to COVID-19 pandemic | 390 | 56 |
| COVID-19 has added or increased personal stressor due to decreased availability of school, childcare, other activity | 469 | 86 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 368 | 53 |
| Aware of wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 234 | 34 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 479 | 70 |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 528 | 77 |
| Have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms: | ||
| Depressed mood | 212 | 31 |
| Anxiety | 424 | 61 |
| Change in sleep habits | 287 | 42 |
| Change in appetite | 145 | 21 |
| Lost interest | 246 | 36 |
| Change in weight | 302 | 44 |
| Change in ability to sustain attention | 231 | 34 |
| Emotional exhaustion | 385 | 56 |
| Depersonalization | 204 | 30 |
| Decrease in sense of personal achievement | 307 | 45 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
ACS, American College of Surgeons; APP, advanced practice provider; MA, medical assistant; PCT, patient care technician; PPE, personal protective equipment.
Early-career surgeons: effect of COVID-19 pandemic on personal experience and risk perception
The majority of respondents (68%) reported taking care of patients with known COVID-19 infection and approximately one-half (52%) reported performing operations and/or an invasive procedure on patients with known COVID-19 infection. Early-career surgeons were asked to cite their biggest concern during the COVID-19 pandemic from the same list as residents (Table 5 ). The top 2 concerns cited were spread of infection to family (40%) and surgical case load/practice concerns (18%). More than one-half (56%) of respondents reported a decrease in compensation during the pandemic, with the majority reporting either a 0% to 10% (35%) or 10% to 20% (27%) decrease in annual income this coming year compared with the previous year. Only 11% of respondents reported receiving hazard pay. A majority of respondents (86%) reported that COVID-19 added or increased personal stressors due to decreased availability of school, childcare, or other activities.
Table 5.
Factors Associated with High Depression Score (4 or More Symptoms) and High Burnout Scores (2 or More Symptoms)
| Depression and burnout, associated factor | Low symptoms |
High symptoms |
p Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | ||
| Depression∗ | |||||
| Membership type | 0.34 | ||||
| Resident member | 315 | 41 | 150 | 38 | |
| Early-career surgeon | 451 | 59 | 244 | 62 | |
| Age | 0.12 | ||||
| 20 to 25 y | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | |
| 26 to 30 y | 124 | 16 | 56 | 14 | |
| 31 to 35 y | 276 | 36 | 133 | 34 | |
| 36 to 40 y | 226 | 30 | 126 | 32 | |
| 40 to 45 y | 137 | 18 | 70 | 18 | |
| Sex, m | 429 | 56 | 183 | 47 | 0.007 |
| Race | 0.06 | ||||
| African American | 23 | 3 | 7 | 2 | |
| Asian | 140 | 19 | 77 | 20 | |
| Caucasian | 465 | 63 | 218 | 57 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 64 | 9 | 52 | 14 | |
| Other | 51 | 7 | 28 | 7 | |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 28 | 4 | 19 | 5 | 0.38 |
| Marital status | 0.06 | ||||
| Divorced | 17 | 2 | 17 | 4 | |
| Married | 504 | 67 | 239 | 62 | |
| Single | 234 | 31 | 130 | 34 | |
| Have children | 389 | 52 | 177 | 46 | 0.07 |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.29 | ||||
| I am not sure | 47 | 6 | 20 | 5 | |
| No | 170 | 22 | 74 | 19 | |
| Yes | 549 | 72 | 298 | 76 | |
| Have you operated or performed an interventional procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.14 | ||||
| I am not sure | 42 | 6 | 25 | 6 | |
| No | 298 | 39 | 130 | 33 | |
| Yes | 424 | 56 | 238 | 61 | |
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | 0.03 | ||||
| Clinical competency | 22 | 3 | 15 | 4 | |
| Education | 11 | 1 | 12 | 3 | |
| Ethical considerations | 33 | 4 | 20 | 5 | |
| Other, please specify | 27 | 4 | 20 | 5 | |
| Spread of infection to family | 298 | 39 | 153 | 39 | |
| Surgical case load | 191 | 25 | 66 | 17 | |
| Administrative issues | 14 | 2 | 11 | 3 | |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 99 | 13 | 65 | 16 | |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 39 | 5 | 15 | 4 | |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 427 | 56 | 181 | 46 | 0.001 |
| Used wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 53 | 10 | 60 | 22 | < 0.001 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 538 | 72 | 241 | 62 | 0.001 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | < 0.001 | ||||
| Do not want to answer | 3 | 0.4 | 5 | 1 | |
| No | 594 | 79 | 265 | 68 | |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 47 | 6 | 26 | 7 | |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 11 | 2 | 11 | 3 | |
| Yes | 97 | 13 | 84 | 22 | |
| Burnout† | |||||
| ACS membership type | 0.18 | ||||
| Resident member | 256 | 38 | 209 | 42 | |
| Early-career surgeon | 411 | 62 | 284 | 58 | |
| Age | 0.08 | ||||
| 20 to 25 y | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | |
| 26 to 30 y | 93 | 14 | 87 | 18 | |
| 31 to 35 y | 248 | 38 | 161 | 33 | |
| 36 to 40 y | 199 | 30 | 153 | 31 | |
| 40 to 45 y | 121 | 18 | 86 | 18 | |
| Sex, m | 382 | 57 | 230 | 47 | 0.002 |
| Race | 0.05 | ||||
| African American | 22 | 3 | 8 | 2 | |
| Asian | 135 | 21 | 82 | 17 | |
| Caucasian | 393 | 61 | 290 | 61 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 56 | 9 | 60 | 13 | |
| Other | 43 | 7 | 36 | 8 | |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 26 | 4 | 21 | 4 | 0.88 |
| Marital status | 0.24 | ||||
| Divorced | 23 | 4 | 11 | 2 | |
| Married | 434 | 66 | 309 | 64 | |
| Single | 199 | 30 | 165 | 34 | |
| Have children | 332 | 51 | 234 | 48 | 0.38 |
| Reduction in elective surgery as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | 0.04 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 88 | 13 | 39 | 8 | |
| 26% to 50% | 92 | 14 | 59 | 12 | |
| 51% to 75% | 139 | 21 | 108 | 22 | |
| 76% to 100% | 312 | 47 | 258 | 52 | |
| Do not know | 12 | 2 | 5 | 1 | |
| No change | 24 | 4 | 23 | 5 | |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.007 | ||||
| I am not sure | 45 | 7 | 22 | 4 | |
| No | 157 | 24 | 87 | 18 | |
| Yes | 464 | 70 | 383 | 78 | |
| Have you operated or performed an interventional procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.008 | ||||
| I am not sure | 39 | 6 | 28 | 6 | |
| No | 271 | 41 | 157 | 32 | |
| Yes | 356 | 54 | 306 | 62 | |
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | 0.06 | ||||
| Clinical competency | 22 | 3 | 15 | 3 | |
| Education | 9 | 1 | 14 | 3 | |
| Ethical considerations | 27 | 4 | 26 | 5 | |
| Spread of infection to family | 258 | 39 | 193 | 39 | |
| Surgical case load | 171 | 26 | 86 | 18 | |
| Administrative issues | 13 | 2 | 12 | 2 | |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 86 | 13 | 78 | 16 | |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 32 | 5 | 22 | 4 | |
| Lost compensation | 24 | 4 | 22 | 4 | |
| Other, please specify | 24 | 4 | 23 | 5 | |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 383 | 58 | 225 | 46 | < 0.001 |
| Used wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 58 | 12 | 55 | 16 | 0.15 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 493 | 75 | 286 | 59 | < 0.001 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | < 0.001 | ||||
| Do not want to answer | 5 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| No | 525 | 80 | 334 | 69 | |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 31 | 5 | 42 | 9 | |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 9 | 2 | 13 | 3 | |
| Yes | 87 | 13 | 94 | 19 | |
ACS, American College of Surgeons; LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others; PPE, personal protective equipment.
Low symptoms (n = 766), high symptoms (n = 394).
Low symptoms (n = 667), high symptoms (n = 493).
When asked whether a respondent's institution or department had instituted any formal mechanisms to support faculty wellness and promote resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic, only about one-half (53%) reported “yes,” and even fewer reported using those wellness resources (18%). Only 34% reported being aware of ACS wellness resources, and even fewer (15%) reported using those resources. The majority of respondents (78%) reported feeling as though they did not have adequate PPE access. Nearly one-quarter of respondents (21%) reported that their institution asked providers to supply their own PPE. The majority (77%) reported that COVID-19 testing was being provided by their institution.
Early-career surgeons were then screened for new or increased symptoms of depression. Much like the response from residents, there were a remarkable number of respondents who reported new or increased depressive symptoms, with 31% reporting depressed mood, 61% reporting anxiety, 42% reporting change in sleeping habits, 21% reporting change in appetite, 36% reporting lack of interest in previously enjoyed activities, 44% reporting change in weight, and 34% reporting a decrease in attention maintenance. Similarly, the majority reported new or increased burnout symptoms, with 56% reporting emotional exhaustion, 30% reporting depersonalization, and 45% reporting decrease in sense of personal accomplishment.
Comparison of residents and early-career surgeons
A comparison of demographics and shared question responses was performed between residents and early-career surgeons (eTable 1, eTable 2, eTable 3, eTable 4). Early-career surgeons were more likely to report an “uptick” in COVID-19 numbers at their institution vs residents (50% vs 41%; p = 0.003). However, early-career surgeons reported less of a decrease in elective case volume. Residents, compared with early-career surgeons, were more likely to report taking care of known COVID-19-positive patients (82% vs 68%; p < 0.001) and performing operations or interventional procedures with known COVID-19-positive patients (66% vs 52%; p < 0.001). In this context, more residents reporting receiving hazard pay than early-career surgeons (19% vs 11% fellows, p < 0.001).
There were differences in the concerns expressed as the most pressing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although both residents' and early-career surgeons' most cited concern was spread of infection to family, this was reported with a slightly higher percent by early-career surgeons (40% vs 37%; p < 0.001). Although both residents and early-career surgeons reported a high rate of new or increased depression and burnout symptoms, residents were more likely to report depersonalization (39% vs 30%; p = 0.002).
Wellness outcomes
To better understand factors associated with high numbers of depression (4 or more positive answers to depression symptoms) and burnout (2 or more positive answer to burnout symptoms) symptoms, a comparison of demographic and COVID-19-specific responses was performed (Table 5). Those who reported high levels of depression were more likely to be women (53% vs 44%; p < 0.007) and less likely to report wellness resources at their institution (46% vs 56%; p = 0.001). Those who reported a high number of depression symptoms were less likely to report access to adequate PPE (62% vs 72%; p = 0.001) and more likely to report their institution requesting that they provide their own PPE (22% vs 13%; p < 0.0001). When examining burnout, similar associations were observed (Table 5). Respondents with a high number of burnout symptoms were more likely to be women (53% vs 42%; p = 0.002), more likely to report a 76% to 100% reduction in elective case volume (52% vs 46%; p = 0.03), and more likely to have reported taking care of (78% vs 70%; p = 0.007), and/or operating on known COVID-19-positive patients (62% vs 54%; p = 0.008). In addition, respondents who reported a high number of burnout symptoms were less likely to report wellness resources at their program (46% vs 58%; p < 0.001), less likely to report adequate access to PPE (59% vs 75%; p < 0.0001), and more likely to report their institution requesting that they provide their own PPE (19% vs 13%; p < 0.001).
After identifying these associations, a multivariable stepwise logistic regression was performed. The following were found to increase the odds of depression: female sex (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.00), lack of wellness resources (adjusted OR 1.55; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.02), being asked to provide one's own PPE (adjusted OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.43), > 25% reduction in emergent case volume (adjusted OR 1.52; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.20), and university affiliation (adjusted OR 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.81). The following were found to increase the odds of burnout: female sex (adjusted OR 1.47; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.89), lack of wellness resources (adjusted OR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.85), and caring for known COVID-19-positive patients (adjusted OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.17). In contrast, having adequate PPE was protective against burnout (adjusted OR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.68).
Discussion
In this survey of more than 1,100 respondents from the ACS RAS and YFA membership, we found that the COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted surgical trainees' and early-career surgeons' clinical and personal experiences. Residents reported a negative impact on their clinical experience, with substantial changes in rotation scheduling and decreased ability to meet minimum case requirements. However, the effect on the educational experience is more mixed, with some reporting an increase in innovative didactics but a reduction in operative autonomy and in-person learning opportunities. Residents also reported a negative impact on personal experience, with nearly one-half reporting decreased physical wellness and sense of physical safety and more than two-thirds reporting decreased emotional wellness. Although residents reported institutional measures aimed to increase safety and address resident concerns, nearly 1 in 3 respondents reported inadequate PPE access and a considerable number reported increased depressive and burnout symptoms. Similarly, associate members (fellows and early-career surgeons) reported a negative effect on clinical and personal experience, with decreased support staff and compensation. They reported increased personal stressors and practice concerns, with decreased awareness of and use of wellness resources. More than three-quarters of early-career surgeons reported inadequate PPE access, and a large number reported increased depression and burnout symptoms. Compared with early-career surgeons, residents were more likely to report taking care of known COVID-19-positive patients and were more likely to report depersonalization symptoms. Lastly, those who reported high depression and burnout symptoms were more likely to be women, less likely to report availability of wellness resources, more likely to report taking care of known COVID-19-positive patients, and less likely to report access to adequate PPE.
In this survey of residents and early-career surgeons in the ACS, respondents generally thought that the COVID-19 pandemic had negative effects on their clinical experience. These results have been echoed in other studies of trainees from surgical trainees in programs based in the US13, 14, 15 and outside of the US,16, 17, 18, 19 citing concerns about severe reductions in training exposure,16, 17, 18, 19 including decreased operative volume,13 and anxiety about a potential required extension of training due to inability to meet operative requirements for graduation.14 , 15 , 17 In addition, not only has a reduction in formalized educational programming for trainees been reported, but on some surveys, residents have reported decreased satisfaction with virtual education programming.20 Our survey results found a mixed response from residents asked about their educational experience, with nearly two-thirds of respondents reporting a negative or extremely negative impact on their didactic educational program and 21% reporting a positive or extremely positive impact on their didactic experience. This latter positive report is likely reflecting quality educational didactic programming created to compensate for loss in real-time clinical education. Unfortunately, the survey was not designed to capture what specifically was found to improve or worsen the educational programming and deserves follow-up investigation. Other surveys of trainees have reported that there is interest in continuing the newly adopted virtual didactic sessions beyond mandated social distancing precautions, as they are an effective method to provide education.21 Many institutions have supplemented their formalized curricula with COVID-19 literature reviews, teleconferencing didactics targeting areas of weakness on earlier in-service examinations, telemedicine involvement, hospital-based and home-based simulation models, modified CME modules, and “virtual” boot camps,1 , 5 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 which have increased resident satisfaction with education. These supplemental didactics serve as exemplars for incorporating novel adjuncts to the traditional educational development.
Deleterious effects on education and clinical work were not the only negative effects of COVID-19 identified by survey respondents, with the majority also reporting negative effects on the personal experience, sense of wellness, and risk perception. A substantial number of residents and early-career surgeons reported taking care of known COVID-19-positive patients, which has been shown to be independently associated with higher levels of anxiety, fear, depression, and work exhaustion.7 , 30 The damaging effect is amplified when combined with concern about PPE availability, which was reported in 35% of our respondents, and is a concern echoed by other healthcare providers who have reported similar shortages and the re-using of PPE.31 Residents and early-career surgeons also reported fear of contracting the virus, a concern not without legitimacy, given reports describing up to a 25% COVID-19-positivity rate in surgical consultants32 and the high rate of potential exposure with residents and early-career surgeons continuing to serve on the frontlines of COVID-19 patient care.16 , 33 However, the prime concern for both early-career surgeons and residents was transmission of infection to family. This concern has been reported similarly, seeming to take a priority over trainees' and early-career surgeons' concern for their own infection risk.13 , 16 , 34 Unfortunately, despite prevalence of the concern for transmission to family, many respondents reported no programming to enhance protection of family, highlighting a potential area for future policy-makers as this pandemic continues.
There are distinct challenges faced by residents compared with early-career surgeons. Although residents are more concerned about decline in surgical case volume and the challenge of meeting minimum case requirements, early-career surgeons are more worried about practice changes, decreased compensation, and future job prospects. This difference has been echoed among other early-career surgeons with reports of rescinded promotions and job offers,35 and surgical trainees completing fellowship in search of jobs.36 , 37 This observed difference between training levels reflects the need for training institutions' response to the pandemic to be catered to level of training and professional development.
The results of this survey identified a high rate of new or increased depression and burnout symptoms in residents and early-career surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. Those who reported high depression and burnout symptoms were less likely to report availability of wellness resources, more likely to report taking care of known COVID-19-positive patients, and less likely to report access to adequate PPE. This is not the first study to highlight declining mental health in healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic and, in particular, trainees compared with attending- or senior-level surgeons.38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 Similar to our findings, a cross-sectional survey of 131 Italian general practitioners demonstrated an association between taking care of COVID-19-positive patients and a lack of PPE with higher depressive symptoms. Amerio and colleagues44 found in their survey of 2,707 healthcare professionals from 60 countries that adequate PPE was protective against burnout (risk ratio 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97). These results illustrate how prioritizing PPE access for healthcare workers could not only improve physical wellness, but is also protective to emotional and mental wellness. Our results also indicated that those who reported high depression and burnout symptoms were more likely to be women, a result that has also been reported in other studies.39 , 40 , 45, 46, 47 Additional reports have also corroborated a disproportionate negative impact of the pandemic on female surgeons' academic professional life (in addition to personal life aspects), which were not specifically measured in our survey.48, 49, 50 However, these data collectively underscore the need for directed programming and additional research to better understand the risk female sex poses to higher rates of burnout, depression, and other associated disparities during such times.
Although many health institutions' main focus is protecting the physical safety and well-being of their workers, less emphasis is placed on supporting the emotional well-being of workers, which is a cause for concern, as highlighted by our results and others. The working conditions during the peak COVID-19 pandemic and the heightened stress, resource limitations, uncertainty of physical safety, and considerable patient morbidity and mortality, have been compared with battlefield conditions. This environment enmeshes providers in uncertainty and anxiety that ultimately predisposes them to stress exposure syndromes, including post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout, as well as a predisposition to medical errors and suboptimal patient care.51, 52, 53 Although our results identify increased PPE availability as a potential target to improve mental well-being in providers, there is also a need for formalized mental health promotion programs. Our results showed that those who report less availability and/or use of wellness programs at their institution were more likely to demonstrate high depressive symptoms and burnout. This result is echoed in a survey of 375 neurosurgeons taking care of COVID-19-positive patients; Sharif and colleagues54 found that the likelihood of depression was higher among providers who did not receive guidance about self-protection from their institution. These results underscore the importance of wellness programming at institutions for providers. Wellness options can include peer programming, formalized counseling, mindfulness and meditation programs, and grassroots wellness initiatives, with existing models of these from across the country serving as exemplars for more widespread adoption.55, 56, 57
The limitations of this study include a small sample size relative to the number of trainees and early-career surgeons in the US, with a response rate of 5.4%. In addition, this survey was sent and responses collected in a finite period (2 weeks in July), which we now recognize might be early in the pandemic and might not fully capture the current situations of trainees and early-career surgeons as institutions slowly adapt beyond the initial peak of the pandemic. There might be sampling bias in that those who are more likely to respond to the survey might have stronger opinions, either positive or negative, about their educational, clinical, and personal experience, potentially limiting generalizability. For example, junior residents and residents from Independent Academic Medical Centers appear to be underrepresented in the response group. However, to the best of our knowledge, this study has the largest sample size of trainees and early-career surgeons compared with existing survey data mentioned that has been published around the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, although institution-specific data were asked about the prevalence and trend of COVID-19 cases, this was not controlled for in answers and it is possible that the heterogeneity of COVID-19 pandemic status in various programs biased responses across the pool of surgeons.
Conclusions
This survey highlights the extent of the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical trainees' and early-career surgeons' clinical, educational, and personal experience. These data also underscore the enormous impact of the stress of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgeons' physical, emotional, and mental well-being. Importantly, the impact of the pandemic is ongoing, with nearly one-half of respondents reporting that there is still an increase in COVID-19 cases at their hospitals. As medical professionals, our obligations extend beyond provision of care to our patients, but also to care for our colleagues and trainees. Improvements to the educational, clinical, and personal experiences of our surgeons and trainees are essential to sustaining the workforce in a pandemic without a clear end point. These improvements must be dynamic with short- and long-term interventions and monitoring, and also be adaptive to the feedback from resident and early-career surgeon input. These data reveal actionable items to facilitate evidence-based guidelines and responses during this major health crisis, including increasing PPE access, increased wellness resources and encouraging their use, and targeting high-risk demographic groups. Adapting future pandemic responses to the needs of surgical trainees and early-career surgeons and improving their educational, clinical, and personal experiences is essential to sustain the workforce through this pandemic and beyond.
Appendix
Members of the RAS-ACS COVID-19 Task Force: Heather Carmichael, MD, Navin G Vigneshwar, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, CO; Randi Ryan, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS; Qiong Qiu, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH; Apoorve Nayyar, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Michael R Visenio, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska, Omaha, NE; Cheyenne C Sonntag, MD, Department of Surgery, Penn State, Hershey, PA; Pranit Chotai, MD, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; Vahagn C Nikolian, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Oregon, Portland, OR; Joana Ochoa, MD, Department of Surgery, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; Patricia Turner, MD, FACS, Division of Member Services, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL.
Author Contributions
Study conception and design: Abdelsattar, Glocker, Carmichael, Vigneshwar, Ryan, Qiu, Nayyar, Visenio, Sonntag, Chotai, Nikolian, Ochoa, Turner
Acquisition of data: Coleman, Abdelsattar
Analysis and interpretation of data: Coleman, Abdelsattar, Carmichael
Drafting of manuscript: Abdelsattar, Glocker, Carmichael, Vigneshwar, Ryan, Qiu, Nayyar, Visenio, Sonntag, Chotai, Nikolian, Ochoa, Turner
Critical revision: Coleman, Abdelsattar, Glocker, Carmichael, Vigneshwar, Ryan, Qiu, Nayyar, Visenio, Sonntag, Chotai, Nikolian, Ochoa, Turner
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the American College of Surgeons for supporting the dissemination of this survey and allowing us to share the results of this membership survey. The authors would also like to thank those who contributed to overall review and suggestions for improvement on the project and article, including Dr Christopher Ellison, Dr David Farley, Dr Naveen Sangji, and Dr Daniel Dent.
Footnotes
Disclosure Information: Nothing to disclose.
Members of the RAS-ACS COVID-19 Task Force who co-authored this article are listed in the Appendix.
Drs Coleman and Abdelsattar contributed equally to this work.
Contributor Information
RAS-ACS COVID-19 Task Force:
Heather Carmichael, Navin G. Vigneshwar, Randi Ryan, Qiong Qiu, Apoorve Nayyar, Michael R. Visenio, Cheyenne C. Sonntag, Pranit Chotai, Vahagn C. Nikolian, Joana Ochoa, and Patricia Turner
Appendices
eTable 1.
Residents' (American College of Surgeons Residents and Associate Society Members) Responses to Survey Questions on Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical, Educational, and Personal Experience
| Experience | Survey response |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Clinical | ||
| Status of COVID-19 admissions at hospital currently | ||
| Do not know | 23 | 5 |
| Numbers are decreasing | 188 | 40 |
| Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve) | 64 | 14 |
| Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve) | 190 | 41 |
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 21 | 4 |
| 26% to 50% | 31 | 7 |
| 51% to 75% | 96 | 18 |
| 76% to 100% | 304 | 65 |
| Do not know | 11 | 2 |
| No change | 12 | 3 |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 111 | 24 |
| 26% to 50% | 92 | 20 |
| 51% to 75% | 61 | 13 |
| 76% to 100% | 17 | 4 |
| Do not know | 39 | 8 |
| No change | 145 | 31 |
| Modification in schedule response to the COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Residents have been completely removed from services | 143 | 31 |
| Residents have been grouped into staggered shifts | 325 | 70 |
| More work is designated to APPs | 36 | 8 |
| Less work is designated to APPs | 69 | 15 |
| Vacations have been rescinded | 152 | 33 |
| Residents have been deployed to nonsurgical services | 163 | 35 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 333 | 72 |
| No changes have been made | 21 | 4 |
| Modification in case coverage in response to COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| No residents are allowed in OR | 5 | 1 |
| More cases are designated to APPs | 4 | 1 |
| No residents are allowed in the OR if a patient is known COVID-19- positive | 37 | 8 |
| Residents are allowed in the OR on a case-by-case basis | 86 | 18 |
| Residents are limited in number in the OR | 199 | 43 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 244 | 52 |
| No changes have been made | 112 | 24 |
| Modification in clinic coverage in response to COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| No residents are allowed in clinic | 127 | 27 |
| Clinic appointments are designated to APPs | 21 | 4 |
| Residents are limited in number in clinic | 92 | 20 |
| Residents are seeing patients via telemedicine appointments | 113 | 24 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 221 | 48 |
| No changes have been made | 76 | 16 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on didactic educational programs | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 55 | 12 |
| Extreme positive impact | 12 | 3 |
| Negative impact | 213 | 50 |
| No impact | 69 | 15 |
| Positive impact | 98 | 21 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on elective operative experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 247 | 53 |
| Negative impact | 199 | 43 |
| No impact | 17 | 4 |
| Positive impact | 1 | 0.2 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on emergent operative experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 31 | 7 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 194 | 42 |
| No impact | 224 | 48 |
| Positive impact | 11 | 2 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinic experience | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 80 | 17 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 263 | 57 |
| No impact | 96 | 21 |
| Positive impact | 22 | 5 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on outside rotations | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 150 | 32 |
| Negative impact | 156 | 34 |
| No impact | 154 | 33 |
| Positive impact | 5 | 1 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on feedback on clinical performance/assessment | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 39 | 9 |
| Extreme positive impact | 1 | 0.2 |
| Negative impact | 135 | 29 |
| No impact | 280 | 60 |
| Positive impact | 8 | 2 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on physical health | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 44 | 10 |
| Extreme positive impact | 6 | 1 |
| Negative impact | 174 | 37 |
| No impact | 189 | 41 |
| Positive impact | 52 | 11 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on physical safety | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 48 | 10 |
| Extreme positive impact | 3 | 0.6 |
| Negative impact | 199 | 43 |
| No impact | 202 | 43 |
| Positive impact | 12 | 3 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on emotional health | ||
| Extreme negative impact | 86 | 18 |
| Extreme positive impact | 6 | 1 |
| Negative impact | 239 | 52 |
| No impact | 111 | 24 |
| Positive impact | 22 | 5 |
| To what degree your institution has demonstrated sensitivity to specific concerns of residents | ||
| Not at all | 35 | 8 |
| Somewhat | 238 | 51 |
| To a great extent | 189 | 41 |
| To what degree your institution has enhanced safety measures in addition to routine use of PPE | ||
| Not at all | 23 | 5 |
| Somewhat | 167 | 36 |
| To a great extent | 275 | 59 |
| To what degree your institution has deployed surgical trainees to non-surgical services | ||
| Not at all | 214 | 46 |
| Somewhat | 130 | 28 |
| To a great extent | 82 | 18 |
| To what degree your institution instituted innovative education and training solutions | ||
| Not at all | 51 | 11 |
| Somewhat | 255 | 55 |
| To a great extent | 154 | 33 |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 22 | 5 |
| No | 64 | 14 |
| Yes | 379 | 82 |
| Have you performed an operation or an invasive procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 24 | 5 |
| No | 136 | 29 |
| Yes | 305 | 66 |
| If a patient is deemed high risk for COVID-19 but test results are pending, how does the surgical team round/take care of patient? | ||
| Full team rounds on patient as usual | 65 | 14 |
| Most senior level resident sees and examines patient | 290 | 62 |
| Only faculty see and examine the patient | 57 | 12 |
| Patient is not examined until test result is secured | 15 | 3 |
| Educational | ||
| Educational programs which have been adapted/modified during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Morbidity and mortality conference | 388 | 83 |
| ABSITE preparation | 163 | 35 |
| Grand rounds | 373 | 80 |
| Visiting professors | 291 | 63 |
| Tumor board | 262 | 56 |
| Research conferences | 288 | 62 |
| Simulation training/center accessibility | 256 | 55 |
| Teaching rounds | 219 | 47 |
| Meetings with mentors | 157 | 34 |
| Interview for fellowship and/or jobs | 252 | 54 |
| Training linked to telehealth platforms | 80 | 17 |
| Impact of COVID-19 pandemic operative volume on ability to meet minimum case requirement | ||
| Greatly impacted | 110 | 24 |
| Not impacted | 163 | 35 |
| Slightly impacted | 189 | 41 |
| Impact of COVID-19 on expected progression of operative autonomy | ||
| Do not know | 53 | 12 |
| Moderately | 195 | 42 |
| Not at all | 136 | 29 |
| To a great extent | 78 | 17 |
| Institutional approach to evaluations during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Business as usual | 303 | 65 |
| End-of-rotation evaluations have been suspended | 36 | 8 |
| End-of-rotation evaluations have been modified to include pandemic-specific concerns | 47 | 10 |
| Number of evaluations has been reduced | 84 | 18 |
| Impact of COVID-19 on formative feedback | ||
| Decreased significantly | 173 | 38 |
| Increased significantly | 9 | 2 |
| Stayed the same | 274 | 60 |
| Personal | ||
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Clinical competency | 37 | 8 |
| Education | 23 | 5 |
| Ethical considerations | 23 | 5 |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 64 | 14 |
| Spread of infection to family | 172 | 37 |
| Surgical case load | 131 | 28 |
| Have you witnessed or been subject to harsh treatment as a result of changes during COVID-19 pandemic | 51 | 11 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 240 | 52 |
| Used wellness or resiliency programs offered by the ACS or other professional societies during the COVID-19 pandemic | 60 | 13 |
| Received bonuses or "hazard pay" | 89 | 19 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 300 | 65 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | ||
| No | 320 | 70 |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 73 | 16 |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 22 | 5 |
| Yes | 38 | 8 |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 364 | 79 |
| Believe type of care and risk of exposure is commensurate with your level of training | 364 | 79 |
| Believe attending surgeons and/or clinical educators are taking on same level of risk | ||
| No, decreased level | 206 | 44 |
| No, increased level | 65 | 14 |
| Yes, same level | 186 | 40 |
| Believe program has treated residents equally as compared with attendings during the pandemic | ||
| Do not want to respond | 21 | 4 |
| No, unequally | 178 | 38 |
| Yes, equally | 264 | 57 |
| Program asked if high risk due to pre-existing condition | 214 | 46 |
| Program instituted the following to reduce risk of families: | 26 | 6 |
| Provided alternative housing or living arrangements | 149 | 32 |
| Provided professional cleaning and sterilization services of homes and living spaces | 5 | 1 |
| Provided cleaning supplies for homes | 2 | 0.4 |
| Program has not done anything | 288 | 62 |
| Have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms: | ||
| Depressed mood | 142 | 30 |
| Anxiety | 250 | 54 |
| Change in sleep habits | 174 | 37 |
| Change in appetite | 101 | 22 |
| Lost interest | 144 | 31 |
| Change in weight | 182 | 39 |
| Change in ability to sustain attention | 165 | 36 |
| Emotional exhaustion | 257 | 55 |
| Depersonalization | 180 | 39 |
| Decrease in sense of personal achievement | 209 | 45 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations
ABSITE, American Board of Surgery in-Training Examination; ACS, American College of Surgeons; APP, advanced practice provider; OR, operating room; PPE, personal protective equipment.
eTable 2.
Early-Career Surgeons' Responses to Survey Questions on Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical and Personal Experience
| Experience | Survey response |
|
|---|---|---|
| n | % | |
| Clinical | ||
| Status of COVID-19 admissions at hospital currently | ||
| Do not know | 28 | 4 |
| Numbers are decreasing | 212 | 30 |
| Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve) | 106 | 15 |
| Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve) | 348 | 50 |
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 15% to 25% | 106 | 15 |
| 26% to 50% | 120 | 17 |
| 51% to 75% | 161 | 23 |
| 76% to 100% | 266 | 38 |
| Do not know | 6 | 1 |
| No change | 35 | 5 |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| 1% to 25% | 192 | 28 |
| 26% to 50% | 124 | 18 |
| 51% to 75% | 62 | 9 |
| 76% to 100% | 10 | 2 |
| Do not know | 34 | 5 |
| No change | 271 | 39 |
| Modification in schedule response to the COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Administrative staff have been fired | 54 | 8 |
| Administrative staff have been furloughed | 200 | 29 |
| Clinical staff (nurses/PCT/MAs) have been fired | 47 | 7 |
| Clinical staff (nurses/PCT/MAs) have been furloughed | 195 | 28 |
| APP staff have been fired | 16 | 2 |
| APP staff have been furloughed | 83 | 12 |
| Physicians have been fired | 33 | 5 |
| Physicians have been furloughed | 72 | 10 |
| More work is designated to APPs | 75 | 11 |
| Less work is designated to APPs | 52 | 8 |
| Vacations have been rescinded | 203 | 29 |
| Physicians have been reassigned to nonsurgical services | 181 | 26 |
| No changes have been made | 89 | 13 |
| Changes were made but the schedule has returned to normal | 280 | 40 |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 45 | 6 |
| No | 180 | 26 |
| Yes | 468 | 68 |
| Have you performed an operation or an invasive procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | ||
| I am not sure | 43 | 6 |
| No | 292 | 42 |
| Yes | 357 | 52 |
| Personal | ||
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | ||
| Administrative issues | 25 | 4 |
| Ethical considerations | 30 | 4 |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 100 | 14 |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 54 | 8 |
| Lost compensation | 46 | 7 |
| Spread of infection to family | 279 | 40 |
| Surgical case load/practice concerns | 126 | 18 |
| Decrease in compensation due to COVID-19 pandemic | 390 | 56 |
| Percent of annual income anticipated to lose this year as compared with previous year | ||
| > 50% | 20 | 4 |
| 0% to 10% | 170 | 36 |
| 10% to 20% | 127 | 27 |
| 20% to 30% | 89 | 19 |
| 30% to 40% | 40 | 8 |
| 40% to 50% | 32 | 7 |
| COVID-19 has added or increased personal stressors due to decreased availability of school, childcare, other activity | 469 | 86 |
| Received bonuses or "hazard pay" | 75 | 11 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanism to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 368 | 53 |
| Has used program's wellness resources | 80 | 18 |
| Aware of wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 234 | 34 |
| Used wellness or resiliency programs offered by the ACS or other professional societies during the COVID-19 pandemic | 53 | 15 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 479 | 70 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | 143 | 21 |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 528 | 77 |
| Have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms: | ||
| Depressed mood | 212 | 31 |
| Anxiety | 424 | 61 |
| Change in sleep habits | 287 | 42 |
| Change in appetite | 145 | 21 |
| Lost interest | 246 | 36 |
| Change in weight | 302 | 44 |
| Change in ability to sustain attention | 231 | 34 |
| Emotional exhaustion | 385 | 56 |
| Depersonalization | 204 | 30 |
| Decrease in sense of personal achievement | 307 | 45 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
ACS, American College of Surgeons; APP, advanced practice provider; MA, medical assistant; PCT, patient care technician; PPE, personal protective equipment.
eTable 3.
Comparison of Survey Responses Between American College of Surgeons Residents and Early-Career Surgeons
| Demographic | Resident (n = 465) |
Associate member (n = 695) |
p Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | ||
| Age | < 0.001 | ||||
| 20 to 25 y | 3 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | |
| 26 to 30 y | 170 | 37 | 10 | 2 | |
| 31 to 35 y | 241 | 52 | 168 | 24 | |
| 36 to 40 y | 46 | 10 | 306 | 45 | |
| 40 to 45 y | 5 | 1 | 202 | 29 | |
| Sex, m | 216 | 47 | 396 | 57 | 0.001 |
| Race | 0.001 | ||||
| African American | 16 | 4 | 14 | 2 | |
| Asian | 71 | 16 | 146 | 22 | |
| Caucasian | 300 | 67 | 383 | 57 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 41 | 9 | 75 | 11 | |
| Other | 20 | 4 | 59 | 9 | |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 29 | 6 | 18 | 3 | 0.004 |
| Marital status | < 0.001 | ||||
| Divorced | 7 | 2 | 27 | 4 | |
| Married | 219 | 48 | 524 | 77 | |
| Single | 232 | 51 | 132 | 19 | |
| Have children | 110 | 24 | 456 | 67 | < 0.001 |
| Region of hospital | < 0.001 | ||||
| Midwest | 96 | 21 | 106 | 15 | |
| Northeast | 152 | 33 | 98 | 14 | |
| South | 99 | 21 | 176 | 25 | |
| Western | 72 | 15 | 113 | 16 | |
| Other | 46 | 10 | 200 | 29 | |
| Institution affiliation | < 0.001 | ||||
| Military | 9 | 2 | 39 | 6 | |
| Non-university affiliated | 75 | 16 | 251 | 36 | |
| Other, please specify | 3 | 1 | 25 | 4 | |
| University affiliated | 377 | 81 | 379 | 55 | |
| Status of COVID-19 admissions at hospital currently | 0.003 | ||||
| Do not know | 23 | 5 | 28 | 4 | |
| Numbers are decreasing | 188 | 40 | 212 | 30 | |
| Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve) | 64 | 14 | 106 | 15 | |
| Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve) | 190 | 41 | 348 | 50 | |
| Reduction in elective operation as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | < 0.001 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 21 | 4 | 106 | 15 | |
| 26% to 50% | 31 | 7 | 120 | 17 | |
| 51% to 75% | 86 | 18 | 161 | 23 | |
| 76% to 100% | 304 | 65 | 266 | 38 | |
| Do not know | 11 | 2 | 6 | 1 | |
| No change | 12 | 3 | 35 | 5 | |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | < 0.001 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 111 | 24 | 192 | 28 | |
| 26% to 50% | 92 | 20 | 124 | 18 | |
| 51% to 75% | 61 | 13 | 62 | 9 | |
| 76% to 100% | 17 | 4 | 10 | 1 | |
| Do not know | 39 | 8 | 34 | 5 | |
| No change | 145 | 31 | 271 | 39 | |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | < 0.001 | ||||
| I am not sure | 22 | 5 | 45 | 6 | |
| No | 64 | 14 | 180 | 26 | |
| Yes | 379 | 81 | 468 | 68 | |
| Have you operated or performed an interventional procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | < 0.001 | ||||
| I am not sure | 24 | 5 | 43 | 6 | |
| No | 136 | 29 | 292 | 42 | |
| Yes | 305 | 66 | 357 | 52 | |
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | < 0.001 | ||||
| Clinical competency | 37 | 8 | 0 | 0 | |
| Education | 23 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ethical considerations | 23 | 5 | 30 | 4 | |
| Other, please specify | 13 | 3 | 34 | 5 | |
| Spread of infection to family | 172 | 37 | 279 | 40 | |
| Surgical case load | 131 | 28 | 126 | 18 | |
| Administrative issues | 0 | 0 | 24 | 4 | |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 64 | 14 | 100 | 14 | |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 0 | 0 | 54 | 8 | |
| Received bonuses or "hazard pay" | 89 | 19 | 75 | 11 | < 0.001 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanism to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 240 | 52 | 368 | 53 | 0.70 |
| Aware of wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 60 | 13 | 53 | 15 | 0.51 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 300 | 66 | 479 | 70 | 0.11 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | < 0.001 | ||||
| Do not want to answer | 3 | 1 | 5 | 1 | |
| No | 320 | 70 | 539 | 78 | |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 73 | 16 | 0 | 0 | |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 22 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Yes | 38 | 8 | 143 | 21 | |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 0.009 | ||||
| Do not want to respond | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| No | 93 | 20 | 154 | 22 | |
| Yes | 364 | 79 | 528 | 77 | |
| Do not want to answer | 0 | 0 | 7 | 1 | |
| Have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms: | |||||
| Depressed mood | 142 | 30 | 212 | 31 | 0.90 |
| Anxiety | 250 | 54 | 424 | 61 | 0.01 |
| Change in sleep habits | 174 | 37 | 287 | 42 | 0.15 |
| Change in appetite | 101 | 22 | 145 | 21 | 0.92 |
| Lost interest | 144 | 31 | 246 | 36 | 0.12 |
| Change in weight | 182 | 39 | 302 | 44 | 0.10 |
| Change in ability to sustain attention | 165 | 36 | 231 | 34 | 0.62 |
| Emotional exhaustion | 257 | 55 | 385 | 56 | 0.96 |
| Depersonalization | 180 | 39 | 204 | 30 | 0.002 |
| Decrease in sense of personal achievement | 209 | 45 | 307 | 45 | 0.94 |
| High depression score | 150 | 32 | 244 | 35 | 0.35 |
| High burnout score | 209 | 45 | 284 | 41 | 0.19 |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and are included in percent calculations.
ACS, American College of Surgeons; LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others; PPE, personal protective equipment.
eTable 4.
Factors Associated with High Depression Score (4 or More Symptoms) and High Burnout Score (2 or More Symptoms)
| Depression and burnout, associated factor | Low symptoms |
High symptoms |
p Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | ||
| Depression∗ | |||||
| Membership type | 0.34 | ||||
| Resident | 315 | 41 | 150 | 38 | |
| Early-career surgeon | 451 | 59 | 244 | 62 | |
| Age | 0.12 | ||||
| 20 to 25 y | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | |
| 26 to 30 y | 124 | 16 | 56 | 14 | |
| 31 to 35 y | 276 | 36 | 133 | 34 | |
| 36 to 40 y | 226 | 30 | 126 | 32 | |
| 40 to 45 y | 137 | 18 | 70 | 18 | |
| Sex, m | 429 | 56 | 183 | 47 | 0.007 |
| Race | 0.06 | ||||
| African American | 23 | 3 | 7 | 2 | |
| Asian | 140 | 19 | 77 | 20 | |
| Caucasian | 465 | 63 | 218 | 57 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 64 | 9 | 52 | 14 | |
| Other | 51 | 7 | 28 | 7 | |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 28 | 4 | 19 | 5 | 0.38 |
| Marital status | 0.06 | ||||
| Divorced | 17 | 2 | 17 | 4 | |
| Married | 504 | 67 | 239 | 62 | |
| Single | 234 | 31 | 130 | 34 | |
| Have children | 389 | 52 | 177 | 46 | 0.07 |
| Region of hospital | 0.37 | ||||
| Midwest | 139 | 18 | 63 | 16 | |
| Northeast | 168 | 22 | 82 | 21 | |
| South | 182 | 24 | 89 | 23 | |
| Western | 125 | 16 | 60 | 15 | |
| Other | 152 | 20 | 98 | 25 | |
| Institutional affiliation | 0.46 | ||||
| Military | 35 | 5 | 13 | 3 | |
| Non-university affiliated | 222 | 29 | 104 | 26 | |
| University affiliated | 489 | 64 | 267 | 68 | |
| Other, please specify | 20 | 3 | 8 | 2 | |
| Status of COVID-19 admissions at hospital currently | 0.20 | ||||
| Do not know | 35 | 5 | 16 | 4 | |
| Numbers are decreasing | 277 | 36 | 123 | 31 | |
| Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve) | 115 | 15 | 55 | 14 | |
| Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve) | 338 | 44 | 200 | 51 | |
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | 0.24 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 94 | 12 | 33 | 8 | |
| 26% to 50% | 104 | 14 | 47 | 12 | |
| 51% to 75% | 155 | 20 | 92 | 23 | |
| 76% to 100% | 371 | 48 | 199 | 51 | |
| Do not know | 13 | 2 | 4 | 1 | |
| No change | 29 | 4 | 18 | 5 | |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | 0.07 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 208 | 27 | 95 | 24 | |
| 26% to 50% | 140 | 18 | 76 | 19 | |
| 51% to 75% | 69 | 9 | 54 | 14 | |
| 76% to 100% | 18 | 2 | 9 | 2 | |
| Do not know | 56 | 7 | 17 | 4 | |
| No change | 273 | 36 | 143 | 36 | |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.29 | ||||
| I am not sure | 47 | 6 | 20 | 5 | |
| No | 170 | 22 | 74 | 19 | |
| Yes | 549 | 72 | 298 | 76 | |
| Have you operated or performed an interventional procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.14 | ||||
| I am not sure | 42 | 6 | 25 | 6 | |
| No | 298 | 39 | 130 | 33 | |
| Yes | 424 | 56 | 238 | 61 | |
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | 0.03 | ||||
| Clinical competency | 22 | 3 | 15 | 4 | |
| Education | 11 | 1 | 12 | 3 | |
| Ethical considerations | 33 | 4 | 20 | 5 | |
| Other, please specify | 27 | 4 | 20 | 5 | |
| Spread of infection to family | 298 | 39 | 153 | 39 | |
| Surgical case load | 191 | 25 | 66 | 17 | |
| Administrative issues | 14 | 2 | 11 | 3 | |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 99 | 13 | 65 | 16 | |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 39 | 5 | 15 | 4 | |
| Lost compensation | 30 | 4 | 16 | 4 | |
| Received bonuses or "hazard pay" | 114 | 15 | 50 | 13 | 0.38 |
| Program has instituted formal mechanism to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 427 | 56 | 181 | 46 | 0.001 |
| Used wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 53 | 10 | 60 | 22 | < 0.001 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 538 | 72 | 241 | 62 | 0.001 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | < 0.001 | ||||
| Do not want to answer | 3 | 0.4 | 5 | 1 | |
| No | 594 | 79 | 265 | 68 | |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 47 | 6 | 26 | 7 | |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 11 | 2 | 11 | 3 | |
| Yes | 97 | 13 | 84 | 22 | |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 0.51 | ||||
| Do not want to respond | 3 | 0.4 | 1 | 0.3 | |
| No | 153 | 20 | 94 | 24 | |
| Yes | 596 | 79 | 296 | 75 | |
| Do not want to answer | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |
| Burnout† | |||||
| Membership type | 0.18 | ||||
| Resident | 256 | 38 | 209 | 42 | |
| Early-career surgeon | 411 | 62 | 284 | 58 | |
| Age | 0.08 | ||||
| 20 to 25 y | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | |
| 26 to 30 y | 93 | 14 | 87 | 18 | |
| 31 to 35 y | 248 | 38 | 161 | 33 | |
| 36 to 40 y | 199 | 30 | 153 | 31 | |
| 40 to 45 y | 121 | 18 | 86 | 18 | |
| Sex, m | 382 | 57 | 230 | 47 | 0.002 |
| Race | 0.05 | ||||
| African American | 22 | 3 | 8 | 2 | |
| Asian | 135 | 21 | 82 | 17 | |
| Caucasian | 393 | 61 | 290 | 61 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 56 | 9 | 60 | 13 | |
| Other | 43 | 7 | 36 | 8 | |
| LGBTQ+ sexual orientation | 26 | 4 | 21 | 4 | 0.88 |
| Marital status | 0.24 | ||||
| Divorced | 23 | 4 | 11 | 2 | |
| Married | 434 | 66 | 309 | 64 | |
| Single | 199 | 30 | 165 | 34 | |
| Have children | 332 | 51 | 234 | 48 | 0.38 |
| Region of hospital | 0.06 | ||||
| Midwest | 121 | 18 | 81 | 16 | |
| Northeast | 128 | 19 | 122 | 25 | |
| South | 166 | 25 | 105 | 21 | |
| Western | 98 | 15 | 87 | 18 | |
| Other | 153 | 23 | 97 | 20 | |
| Institutional affiliation | 0.18 | ||||
| Military | 31 | 5 | 17 | 4 | |
| Non-university affiliated | 189 | 28 | 137 | 28 | |
| University affiliated | 426 | 64 | 330 | 67 | |
| Other, please specify | 21 | 3 | 7 | 1 | |
| Status of COVID-19 admissions at hospital currently | 0.47 | ||||
| Do not know | 26 | 4 | 25 | 5 | |
| Numbers are decreasing | 238 | 36 | 162 | 33 | |
| Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve) | 102 | 15 | 68 | 14 | |
| Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve) | 301 | 45 | 237 | 48 | |
| Reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | 0.04 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 88 | 13 | 39 | 8 | |
| 26% to 50% | 92 | 14 | 59 | 12 | |
| 51% to 75% | 139 | 21 | 108 | 22 | |
| 76% to 100% | 312 | 47 | 258 | 52 | |
| Do not know | 12 | 2 | 5 | 1 | |
| No change | 24 | 4 | 23 | 5 | |
| Reduction in emergent operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic | 0.20 | ||||
| 1% to 25% | 179 | 27 | 124 | 25 | |
| 26% to 50% | 111 | 17 | 105 | 21 | |
| 51% to 75% | 64 | 10 | 59 | 12 | |
| 76% to 100% | 15 | 2 | 12 | 2 | |
| Do not know | 42 | 6 | 31 | 6 | |
| No change | 254 | 38 | 162 | 33 | |
| Have you taken care of a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.007 | ||||
| I am not sure | 45 | 7 | 22 | 4 | |
| No | 157 | 24 | 87 | 18 | |
| Yes | 464 | 70 | 383 | 78 | |
| Have you operated or performed an interventional procedure on a COVID-19-positive patient? | 0.008 | ||||
| I am not sure | 39 | 6 | 28 | 6 | |
| No | 271 | 41 | 157 | 32 | |
| Yes | 356 | 54 | 306 | 62 | |
| Biggest concern during COVID-19 pandemic | 0.06 | ||||
| Clinical competency | 22 | 3 | 15 | 3 | |
| Education | 9 | 1 | 14 | 3 | |
| Ethical considerations | 27 | 4 | 26 | 5 | |
| Spread of infection to family | 258 | 39 | 193 | 39 | |
| Surgical case load | 171 | 26 | 86 | 18 | |
| Administrative issues | 13 | 2 | 12 | 2 | |
| Fear of contracting COVID-19 | 86 | 13 | 78 | 16 | |
| Household issues relating to children or other dependents | 32 | 5 | 22 | 4 | |
| Lost compensation | 24 | 4 | 22 | 4 | |
| Other, please specify | 24 | 4 | 23 | 5 | |
| Received bonuses or "hazard pay" | 0.31 | ||||
| Do not want to respond | 16 | 2 | 7 | 1 | |
| No | 554 | 84 | 407 | 83 | |
| Yes | 88 | 13 | 76 | 16 | |
| Program has instituted formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency | 383 | 58 | 225 | 46 | < 0.001 |
| Used wellness programs from ACS and other professional societies | 58 | 12 | 55 | 16 | 0.15 |
| Perceived to have adequate PPE access | 493 | 75 | 286 | 59 | < 0.001 |
| Program has asked you to provide your own PPE | < 0.001 | ||||
| Do not want to answer | 5 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| No | 525 | 80 | 334 | 69 | |
| No, however, external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director | 31 | 5 | 42 | 9 | |
| No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director | 9 | 2 | 13 | 3 | |
| Yes | 87 | 13 | 94 | 19 | |
| Program has provided COVID-19 testing | 0.52 | ||||
| Do not want to respond | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0.2 | |
| No | 134 | 20 | 113 | 23 | |
| Yes | 518 | 79 | 374 | 76 | |
Data are not shown for "prefer not to answer" or "other" responses and is included in percent calculations.
ACS, American College of Surgeons; LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others; PPE, personal protective equipment.
Depression: low symptoms (n = 766), high symptoms (n = 394).
Burnout: low symptoms (n = 667), high symptoms (n = 493).
eDocument 1
American College of Surgeons Survey
Dear Young Surgeon:
We invite you to participate in a brief online survey on your clinical, educational, and personal experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The goal of this survey is to describe the experiences of young surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic (specifically focusing on your clinical, educational, and personal experience) and to assist in informing future pandemic planning by highlighting the collective experiences of young surgeons.
Your participation is voluntary, and your responses will not be linked to your identity in any way, and this survey is completely anonymous. By participating in this survey, you consent to your anonymized data being used for analysis, presentation to the American College of Surgeons (ACS) leadership, and/or publication.
American College of Surgeon status:
-
•
Resident member of ACS—Direct to resident questions
-
•
Associate Fellow member of ACS (out of training but not yet a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons [FACS])—Direct to Associate and YFA questions
-
•
Young Fellow member of ACS (carry the FACS credentials, and are 45 years or younger)—Direct to Associate and YFA questions
-
•
Fellow of ACS older than 45 years—Direct to disqualification message
-
•
Affiliate member of ACS—Direct to disqualification message
Resident Questions
Section 1: program information and demographics
-
1.What is your age?
-
•20 to 25 years
-
•26 to 30 years
-
•31 to 35 years
-
•36 to 40 years
-
•40+ years
-
•Do not want to specify
-
•
-
2.What is your sex?
-
•Male
-
•Female
-
•Other
-
•Do not want to specify
-
•
-
3.What is your ethnicity?
-
•Caucasian
-
•African American
-
•Hispanic/Latino
-
•Asian
-
•Other
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
4.What is your sexual orientation?
-
•Heterosexual
-
•LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (or questioning) and others)
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
5.What is your marital status?
-
•Married
-
•Single
-
•Divorced
-
•Widowed
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
6.Do you have children?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
7.In which region is your residency located?
-
•Northeast: Connecticut, Main, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont
-
•South: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington DC, West Virginia
-
•Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin
-
•Western: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming
-
•Other: please specify
-
•
-
8.How would you best describe your primary institution?
-
•University affiliated
-
•Non-university affiliated
-
•Military
-
•Other, please specify
-
•
-
9.What is the size of your residency program?
-
•Fewer than 3 graduating chief residents
-
•4 to 5 graduating chief residents
-
•6 to 8 graduating chief residents
-
•More than 8 graduating chief residents
-
•
-
10.Which of the below best describes your primary institution?
-
•Level I trauma center
-
•Level II trauma center
-
•Level III trauma center
-
•Not accredited as a trauma center
-
•
-
11.What is your current clinical PGY level?
-
•PGY1
-
•PGY2
-
•PGY3
-
•PGY4
-
•PGY5
-
•Currently not a clinical PGY, please specify (eg research resident, fellow)
-
•
-
12.What training program are you in?
-
•Acute care, trauma, and burn
-
•General surgery
-
•Bariatric or minimally invasive surgery
-
•Cardiothoracic surgery
-
•Colorectal surgery
-
•Critical care
-
•Endocrine surgery
-
•Neurological surgery
-
•Ophthalmology
-
•Orthopaedic surgery
-
•Otolaryngology
-
•Palliative care
-
•Pediatric surgery
-
•Plastic and reconstructive surgery
-
•Surgical oncology or hepato-pancreatico-biliary
-
•Transplantation surgery
-
•Urology
-
•Vascular surgery
-
•Other, please specify
-
•
Section 2: effects of covid-19 on clinical experience
-
13.What would you estimate is the status of COVID-19 admissions at your hospital currently?
-
•Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve)
-
•Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve)
-
•Numbers are decreasing
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
14.At the peak of the COVID-19 curve in your area, please indicate any reduction in elective surgery as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, at the institutional level.
-
•No change
-
•1% to 25%
-
•26% to 50%
-
•51% to 75%
-
•76% to 100%
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
15.At the peak of the COVID-19 curve in your area, please indicate any reduction in emergency operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, at the institutional level.
-
•No change
-
•1% to 25%
-
•26% to 50%
-
•51% to 75%
-
•76% to 100%
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
16.What scheduling changes, if any, has your program made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (select all that apply)
-
•Residents have been completely removed from some services
-
•Residents have been grouped into staggered shifts
-
•More work is designated to advanced practice providers (APPs) (physician assistants [PAs], nurse practitioners [NPs])
-
•Less work is designated to APPs (PAs, NPs)
-
•Vacations have been rescinded
-
•Residents have been re-deployed to nonsurgical services
-
•No changes have been made
-
•Changes were made but the schedule has now returned to “normal”
- Comments
-
•
-
17.What modifications in case coverage have taken in place, if any, during the COVID-19 pandemic? (select all that apply)
-
•No residents are allowed in the operating room
-
•More cases are designated to APPs (PA, NPs)
-
•No residents are allowed in the operating room if a patient is known COVID-19 positive
-
•Residents are allowed in the operating room on a case-by-case basis
-
•Residents are limited in number in the operating room (eg chief residents only, senior residents only)
-
•Changes were made but the schedule has now returned to “normal”
-
•No changes have been made
-
•Do not know
-
•
-
18.What modifications in clinic coverage have taken in place, if any, during the COVID-19 pandemic? (select all that apply)
-
•No residents are allowed in clinic
-
•Clinic appointments are designated to APPs (PA, NPs)
-
•Residents are limited in number in clinic (eg chief residents only, senior residents only)
-
•Residents are seeing patients via telemedicine appointments
-
•Changes were made but the schedule has now returned to “normal”
-
•No changes have been made
-
•Do not know
-
•
-
19.
What has been the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on your experience in the following areas:
Matrix/rating scale:Extreme negative impact Negative impact No impact Positive impact Extreme positive impact -
•Didactic educational programs
-
•Elective operative experience
-
•Emergency operative experience
-
•Clinic experience
-
•Outside rotations
-
•Feedback on clinical performance/assessment
-
•Physical health
-
•Physical safety
-
•Emotional health
-
•
-
20
To what degree has your institution taken the following adaptive steps in response to COVID-19
Matrix/rating scale:Not at all Somewhat To a great extent N/A -
•Demonstrating sensitivity to specific concerns of residents
-
•Enhancing safety measures in addition to routine use of personal protective equipment (PPE) (eg social distancing)
-
•Deploying surgical trainee to nonsurgical services
-
•Instituting innovative education and training solutions
-
•
-
21
During the pandemic, have you taken care of patients who tested positive for COVID-19?
-
•
Yes
-
•
No
-
•
I am not sure
Comments
-
22
During the pandemic, have you been involved with interventional procedures (eg operation, bedside procedure) on patients who tested positive for COVID-19?
-
•
Yes
-
•
No
-
•
I am not sure
Comments
-
23
If a patient is deemed high-risk for COVID-19 infection but the test results are still pending, how does the surgical team round/take care of the patient?
-
•
Most senior-level resident sees and examined patient
-
•
Only faculty see and examine the patient
-
•
Full team rounds on patient as usual
-
•
Patient is not examined until test result is back
-
•
Other, please explain
Section 3: effect of COVID-19 on educational experience
-
24.What, if any, adaptations did your program(s) make to education programs for surgical trainees? (eg suspended, virtual, in-person, in-person with virtual option, recorded session [eg podcast, webinar], not applicable) (select all that apply)
-
•Morbidity and mortality
-
•American Board of Surgery In-Service Training Examination preparation
-
•Grand rounds
-
•Visiting professors
-
•Tumor board
-
•Research conferences
-
•Simulation training/center accessibility
-
•Teaching rounds
-
•Meetings with mentors
-
•Interviews for fellowship and/or jobs
-
•Training linked to telehealth platforms
-
•Please include any additional educational programs that were adapted and/or elaborate ways the above program(s) were adapted
-
•
-
25.How has the operative volume during COVID-19 affected you meeting minimum case requirements?
-
•Not impacted
-
•Slightly impacted
-
•Greatly impacted
-
•
-
26.To what extent did COVID-19 impact expected progression of your operative autonomy?
-
•Not at all
-
•Moderately
-
•To a great extent
-
•Do not know
-
•
-
27.Which of the following describes your institution's approach to evaluations during the COVID-19 pandemic? Check all that apply.
-
•Business as usual
-
•End-of-rotation evaluations have been suspended during the pandemic
-
•End-of-rotation evaluations have been modified to include pandemic-specific concerns
-
•The number of evaluations has been reduced
-
•Other, please elaborate
-
•
-
28.How do you believe formative (clinical performance) feedback has been impacted?
-
•Decreased significantly
-
•Stayed the same
-
•Increased significantly If feedback to learners has been modified in any way in response to COVID-19 pandemic, please describe here
-
•
Section 4: effects of COVID-19 on personal experience and risk perception
-
29.What has been your biggest concern during the COVID-19 pandemic? Please choose 1:
-
•Education
-
•Clinical competency
-
•Surgical case load
-
•Ethical considerations
-
•Fear of contracting COVID-19
-
•Spread of infection to family
-
•Other, please specify
-
•
-
30.As a result of changes during the COVID-19 pandemic, have you witnessed or been subject to harsh (eg what you believe to be unfair, unprofessional) treatment by attending physicians at your hospital? Please describe.
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
31.Has your program instituted any formal mechanisms to support resident wellness and promote resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic?
-
•Yes
-
•No
- Comments
-
•
-
32.Have you used any wellness or resiliency resources offered by the ACS or other professional societies during the COVID-19 pandemic?
-
•Yes
-
•No
- Comments
-
•
-
33.Has your hospital system provided any residents with bonuses or “hazard pay”? If so, please describe amount.
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
34.Do you feel you have had adequate access to PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic and treating COVID-19 patients?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•
-
35.Has your program asked you to provide your own PPE, whether medical grade or homemade?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•No, however external PPE was independently acquired by residents and approved by the program director
-
•No, however, external PPE was requested by residents and acquired by the program director
-
•Do not want to answer
- Comments
-
•
-
36.Has your program provided COVID-19 testing of employees? If so, in what circumstances?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to answer
- Comments (feel free to elaborate, as we recognize policies can be fluid based on local status on “COVID-19 curve”)
-
•
-
37.Do you feel like the type of care and risk of exposure you are being asked to take on is commensurate with your level of training, experience, and/or COVID-19-specific preparation by your program?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
38.Do you feel attending surgeons and/or clinical educators are taking on the same level of risk compared with residents?
-
•Yes, same level
-
•No, increased level
-
•No, decreased level
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
39.Do you think your program has treated the residents equally compared with attending surgeons during this pandemic?
-
•Yes, equally
-
•No, unequally
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
40.Please respond if you have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms of depression (yes/no)
-
•Depression
-
•Anxiety
-
•Sleep problems
-
•Change in appetite
-
•Lack of interest or happiness in things you previously enjoyed
-
•Weight loss or gain
-
•Difficulty with attention
-
•
-
41.Please respond if you have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms of burnout (yes/no)
-
•Emotional exhaustion (feelings of being emotionally overextended and exhausted by one's work)
-
•Depersonalization (feeling an impersonal response towards patients)
-
•Personal accomplishment (diminished feelings of competence and successful achievement in one's work)
-
•
-
42.Did your program leadership inquire whether any resident believes they are at high risk due to a pre-existing medical condition? If so, what was done to decrease risk of infection?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comments
-
•
-
43.Has your program done anything to reduce the risk of the families of residents? Choose all that apply:
-
•Provided alternative housing or living arrangements
-
•Provided professional cleaning and sterilization services of homes and living spaces
-
•Provided cleaning supplies for homes
-
•My program has not done anything
- Comments
-
•
Associate Fellow and Young Fellows Association Questions
Section 1: program information and demographics
-
1.What is your age?
-
•26 to 30 y
-
•31 to 35 y
-
•36 to 40 y
-
•40 to 45 y
-
•Do not want to specify
-
•
-
2.What is your sex?
-
•Male
-
•Female
-
•Other
-
•Do not want to specify
-
•
-
3.What is your sexual orientation?
-
•Heterosexual
-
•LGBTQ+
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
4.What is your marital status?
-
•Married
-
•Single
-
•Divorced
-
•Widowed
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
5.What is your ethnicity?
-
•Caucasian
-
•African American
-
•Hispanic/Latino
-
•Asian
-
•Other
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
6.Do you have children?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Prefer not to answer
-
•
-
7.In which region is your practice located?
-
•Northeast: Connecticut, Main, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont
-
•South: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington DC, West Virginia
-
•Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin
-
•Western: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming
-
•Other: please specify
-
•
-
8.How would you best describe your primary institution?
-
•University affiliated
-
•Non-university affiliated
-
•Military
-
•Other, please specify
-
•
-
9.What type of practice are you in?
-
•Acute care, trauma, and burn
-
•General surgery
-
•Bariatric or minimally invasive surgery
-
•Cardiothoracic surgery
-
•Colorectal surgery
-
•Critical care
-
•Endocrine surgery
-
•Neurological surgery
-
•Ophthalmology
-
•Orthopaedic surgery
-
•Otolaryngology
-
•Palliative care
-
•Pediatric surgery
-
•Plastic and reconstructive surgery
-
•Surgical oncology or hepato-pancreatico-biliary
-
•Transplant surgery
-
•Urology
-
•Vascular surgery
-
•Other, please specify
-
•
Section 2: effects of COVID-19 on clinical experience
-
10.What would you estimate is the status of COVID-19 admissions at your hospital currently?
-
•Numbers are still increasing (“uptick” of the curve)
-
•Numbers are starting to level (“flattened” part of curve)
-
•Numbers are decreasing
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
11.Compared with normal volumes, at its most significant, please indicate any reduction in elective operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, at the institutional level.
-
•No change
-
•1% to 25% reduction
-
•26% to 50% reduction
-
•51% to 75% reduction
-
•76% to 100% reduction
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
12.Compared with normal volumes, at its most significant, please indicate any reduction in emergency operations as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, at the institutional level.
-
•No change
-
•1% to 25% reduction
-
•26% to 50% reduction
-
•51% to 75% reduction
-
•76% to 100% reduction
-
•Do not know
- Comments
-
•
-
13.What scheduling changes, if any, have your program made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (select all that apply)
-
•Administrative staff have been fired
-
•Administrative staff have been furloughed
-
•Clinical staff (nurses/patient care technicians [PCTs]/medical assistants [MAs]) have been fired
-
•Clinical staff (nurses/PCTs/MAs) have been furloughed
-
•APP staff have been fired
-
•APP Staff Have been furloughed
-
•Physicians have been fired
-
•Physicians have been furloughed
-
•More work is designated to APPs (physician's assistants [PAs], nurse practitioners [NPs])
-
•Less work is designated to APPs (PA, NPs)
-
•Vacations have been rescinded
-
•Physicians have been re-assigned to nonsurgical services
-
•No changes have been made
-
•Changes were made but the schedule has now returned to “normal”
- Comments
-
•
-
14.During the pandemic, have you taken care of patients who tested positive for COVID-19?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•I am not sure
- Comments
-
•
-
15.During the pandemic, have you been involved with interventional procedures (eg surgery, bedside procedure) on patients who tested positive for COVID-19?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•I am not sure
- Comments
-
•
Section 3: effects of COVID-19 on personal experience and risk perception
-
16.What has been your biggest concern during the COVID-19 pandemic? Please choose 1:
-
•Surgical case load/practice concerns
-
•Administrative issues
-
•Lost compensation
-
•Ethical considerations
-
•Fear of contracting COVID-19
-
•Spread of infection to family
-
•Household issues relating to children or other dependents Other, please specify
-
•
-
17.Have you or will you see a decrease in compensation due to COVID-19?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•
-
18.If yes, what percentage of annual income are you anticipating losing on a yearly basis compared with previous year.
-
•0% to 10%
-
•10% to 20%
-
•20% to 30%
-
•30% to 40%
-
•40% to 50%
-
•> 50%
-
•
-
19.If yes, has COVID-19 added or increased the level or amount of personal stressors due to decreased availability of school, childcare, other activities?
-
•Yes
-
•No
- Comments
-
•
-
20.Has your hospital system provided any bonuses or “hazard pay”? If so, please describe amount.
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to respond
- Comment
-
•
-
21.Has your institution or department instituted any formal mechanism to support faculty wellness and promote resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic?
-
•Yes
-
•No
- Comments
-
•
-
22.If yes to above, have you used those mechanisms?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•
-
23.Are you aware of any wellness or resiliency mechanisms available to you from ACS or other organizations or professional societies during the COVID-19 pandemic?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Comments
-
•
-
24.If yes to above, have you used those mechanisms?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•
-
25.Do you feel you have had adequate access to PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic and treating COVID-19 patients?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•
-
26.Has your institution asked you to provide your own PPE, whether medical grade or homemade?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to answer
-
•Comments
-
•
-
27.Has your institution provided COVID-19 testing of employees? If so, in what circumstances?
-
•Yes
-
•No
-
•Do not want to answer Comments (feel free to elaborate, as we recognize policies can be fluid based on local status on “COVID-19 curve”)
-
•
-
28.Please respond if you have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms of depression (yes/no)
-
•Depression
-
•Anxiety
-
•Sleep problems
-
•Change in appetite
-
•Lack of interest or happiness in things you previously enjoyed
-
•Weight loss or gain
-
•Difficulty with attention
-
•
-
29.Please respond if you have experienced new or an increase in the following symptoms of burnout (yes/no)
-
•Emotional exhaustion (feelings of being emotionally overextended and exhausted by one's work)
-
•Depersonalization (feeling an impersonal response towards patients)
-
•Personal accomplishment (diminished feelings of competence and successful achievement in one's work)
-
•
References
- 1.Edwards J.A., Breitman I., Kovatch I. Lessons learned at a COVID-19 designated hospital. Am J Surg. 2020 Aug 4 doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.07.029. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Dedeilia A., Sotiropoulos M.G., Hanrahan J.G. Medical and surgical education challenges and innovations in the COVID-19 era: a systematic review. In Vivo. 2020;34(Suppl):1603–1611. doi: 10.21873/invivo.11950. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Al-Jabir A., Kerwan A., Nicola M. Impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on surgical practice—part 1. Int J Surg. 2020;79:168–179. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.05.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Okland T.S., Pepper J.P., Valdez T.A. How do we teach surgical residents in the COVID-19 era? J Surg Educ. 2020;77:1005–1007. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.05.030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Chick R.C., Clifton G.T., Peace K.M. Using Technology to maintain the education of residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Surg Educ. 2020;77:729–732. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.03.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Kannampallil T.G., Goss C.W., Evanoff B.A. Exposure to COVID-19 patients increases physician trainee stress and burnout. PLoS One. 2020;15(8) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Evanoff B.A., Strickland J.R., Dale A.M. Work-related and personal factors associated with mental well-being during COVID-19 response: a survey of health care and other workers. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22 doi: 10.2196/21366. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Aziz H., James T., Remulla D. Effect of COVID-19 on surgical training across the United States: a national survey of general surgery residents. J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul 30 doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.07.037. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kroenke K., Spitzer R.L., Williams J.B. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606–613. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.McManus I.C., Winder B.C., Gordon D. The causal links between stress and burnout in a longitudinal study of UK doctors. Lancet. 2002;359:2089–2090. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08915-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Riley M.R., Mohr D.C., Waddimba A.C. The reliability and validity of three-item screening measures for burnout: evidence from group-employed health care practitioners in upstate New York. Stress Health. 2018;34:187–193. doi: 10.1002/smi.2762. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Hu Y.Y., Ellis R.J., Hewitt D.B. Discrimination, abuse, harassment, and burnout in surgical residency training. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1741–1752. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1903759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Collins C., Mahuron K., Bongiovanni T. Stress and the surgical resident in the COVID-19 pandemic. J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul 25 doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.07.031. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Fero K.E., Weinberger J.M., Lerman S., Bergman J. Perceived impact of urologic surgery training program modifications due to COVID-19 in the United States. Urology. 2020;143:62–67. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.05.051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Huntley R.E., Ludwig D.C., Dillon J.K. Early effects of COVID-19 on oral and maxillofacial surgery residency training-results from a national survey. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;78:1257–1267. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2020.05.026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Balhareth A., AlDuhileb M.A., Aldulaijan F.A., Aldossary M.Y. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on residency and fellowship training programs in Saudi Arabia: a nationwide cross-sectional study. Ann Med Surg. 2020;57:127–132. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2020.07.025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Caruana E.J., Patel A., Kendall S., Rathinam S. Impact of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) on training and well-being in subspecialty surgery:a national survey of cardiothoracic trainees in the United Kingdom. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;160:980–987. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.05.052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Amparore D., Claps F., Cacciamani G.E. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urology residency training in Italy. Ital J Urol Nephrol. 2020;72:505–509. doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03868-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Osama M., Zaheer F., Saeed H. Impact of COVID-19 on surgical residency programs in Pakistan; a residents' perspective. Do programs need formal restructuring to adjust with the "new normal"? A cross-sectional survey study. Int J Surg. 2020;79:252–256. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.06.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Chang D.G., Park J.B., Baek G.H. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic resident education: a nationwide survey study in South Korea. Int Orthop. 2020;1–8 doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04714-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Figueroa F., Figueroa D., Calvo-Mena R. Orthopedic surgery residents' perception of online education in their programs during the COVID-19 pandemic: should it be maintained after the crisis? Acta Orthop. 2020:1–4. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1776461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Adesoye T., Davis C.H., Del Calvo H. Optimization of surgical resident safety and education during the COVID-19 pandemic—lessons learned. J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul 1 doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.06.040. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bhashyam A.R., Dyer G.S.M. "Virtual" boot camp: orthopaedic intern education in the time of COVID-19 and beyond. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28:e735–e743. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-00559. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Gawad N., Towaij C., Stuleanu T. Prioritizing resident and patient safety while maintaining educational value: emergency restructuring of a Canadian surgical residency program during COVID-19. Can J Surg. 2020;63:E302–E305. doi: 10.1503/cjs.006120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Juprasert J.M., Gray K.D., Moore M.D. Restructuring of a general surgery residency program in an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: lessons from New York City. JAMA Surgery. 2020 Jul 7 doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.3107. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Kanneganti A., Sia C.H., Ashokka B., Ooi S.B.S. Continuing medsical education during a pandemic: an academic institution's experience. Postgrad Med J. 2020;96:384–386. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-137840. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.McKechnie T., Levin M., Zhou K. Virtual surgical training during COVID-19: operating room simulation platforms accessible from home. Ann Surg. 2020;272:e153–e154. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Prsic A., Boyajian M.K., Snapp W.K. A 3-dimensional-printed hand model for home-based acquisition of fracture fixation skills without fluoroscopy. J Surg Educ. 2020 Jun doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.05.027. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Rasouli J.J., Shin J.H., Than K.D. Virtual spine: a novel, international teleconferencing program developed to increase the accessibility of spine education during the COVID-19 pandemic. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:e367–e372. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.05.191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Lu W., Wang H., Lin Y., Li L. Psychological status of medical workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. Psychiatry Res. 2020;288:112936. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112936. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Latz C.A., Boitano L.T., Png C.Y.M. Early vascular surgery response to the COVID-19 pandemic: results of a nationwide survey. J Vasc Surg. 2020 May 23 doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.05.032. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Álvarez Gallego M., Gortázar de Las Casas S., Pascual Migueláñez I. SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the activity and professionals of a general surgery and digestive surgery service in a tertiary hospital. Cir Esp. 2020;98:320–327. doi: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2020.04.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.An T.W., Henry J.K., Igboechi O. How Are orthopaedic surgery residencies responding to the COVID-19 pandemic? An assessment of resident experiences in cities of major virus outbreak. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28:e679–e685. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-00397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.He K., Stolarski A., Whang E., Kristo G. Addressing general surgery residents' concerns in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. J Surg Educ. 2020;77:735–738. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.04.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Culp B.M., Frisch N.B. COVID-19 impact on young arthroplasty surgeons. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35:S42–S44. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.04.058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Guo T., Kiong K.L., Yao C. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on otolaryngology trainee education. Head Neck. 2020 Jul 15 doi: 10.1002/hed.26368. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Pelargos P.E., Chakraborty A., Zhao Y.D. An evaluation of neurosurgical resident education and sentiment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a North American Survey. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:e381–e386. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.05.263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Bradley M., Chahar P. Burnout of healthcare providers during COVID-19. Cleve Clin J Med. 2020 Jul 9 doi: 10.3949/ccjm.87a.ccc051. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Civantos A.M., Byrnes Y., Chang C. Mental health among otolaryngology resident and attending physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: national study. Head Neck. 2020;42:1597–1609. doi: 10.1002/hed.26292. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Di Tella M., Romeo A., Benfante A., Castelli L. Mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Jul 25 doi: 10.1111/jep.13444. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Hu D., Kong Y., Li W. Frontline nurses' burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear statuses and their associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China: a large-scale cross-sectional study. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;24:100424. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Luceño-Moreno L., Talavera-Velasco B., García-Albuerne Y., Martín-García J. Symptoms of posttraumatic stress, anxiety, depression, levels of resilience and burnout in Spanish health personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environm Res Public Health. 2020;17(15) doi: 10.3390/ijerph17155514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Vafaei H., Roozmeh S., Hessami K. Obstetrics healthcare providers' mental health and quality of life during COVID-19 pandemic: multicenter study from eight cities in Iran. Psychol Res Behav Manage. 2020;13:563–571. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S256780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Amerio A., Bianchi D., Santi F. Covid-19 pandemic impact on mental health: a web-based cross-sectional survey on a sample of Italian general practitioners. Acta Biomed. 2020;91:83–88. doi: 10.23750/abm.v91i2.9619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Naser A.Y., Dahmash E.Z., Al-Rousan R. Mental health status of the general population, healthcare professionals, and university students during 2019 coronavirus disease outbreak in Jordan: a cross-sectional study. Brain Behav. 2020;10 doi: 10.1002/brb3.1730. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Yildirim T.T., Atas O., Asafov A. Psychological status of healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2020;30:26–31. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2020.Supp1.S26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Zhu Z., Xu S., Wang H. COVID-19 in Wuhan: sociodemographic characteristics and hospital support measures associated with the immediate psychological impact on healthcare workers. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;24:100443. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Kibbe M.R. Consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on manuscript submissions by women. JAMA Surg. 2020 Aug 4 doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.3917. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Pinho-Gomes A.C., Peters S., Thompson K. Where are the women? Gender inequalities in COVID-19 research authorship. BMJ Global Health. 2020;5 doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002922. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Gabster B.P., van Daalen K., Dhatt R., Barry M. Challenges for the female academic during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet. 2020;395(10242):1968–1970. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31412-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Ballesio A., Lombardo C., Lucidi F., Violani C. Caring for the carers: advice for dealing with sleep problems of hospital staff during the COVID-19 outbreak. J Sleep Res. 2020 Jun 8 doi: 10.1111/jsr.13096. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Barello S., Palamenghi L., Graffigna G. Burnout and somatic symptoms among frontline healthcare professionals at the peak of the Italian COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Res. 2020;290:113129. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Preti E., Di Mattei V., Perego G. The psychological impact of epidemic and pandemic outbreaks on healthcare workers: rapid review of the evidence. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2020;22:43. doi: 10.1007/s11920-020-01166-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Sharif S., Amin F., Hafiz M. COVID 19-depression and neurosurgeons. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:e401–e410. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.06.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Albott C.S., Wozniak J.R., McGlinch B.P. Battle buddies: rapid deployment of a psychological resilience intervention for health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Anesth Analg. 2020;131:43–54. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004912. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Lie J.J., Huynh C., Scott T.M., Karimuddin A.A. Optimizing resident wellness during a pandemic: University of British Columbia's General surgery program's COVID-19 experience. J J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul 19 doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.07.017. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Behan C. The benefits of meditation and mindfulness practices during times of crisis such as COVID-19. Ir J Psychol Med. 2020 May 14 doi: 10.1017/ipm.2020.38. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

