No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although nonphysician reentry transitions have been characterized in literature, little is known about the reentry physicians in general, or residents in particular. We conducted a qualitative study to explore pediatric residents' reentry, using reverse culture shock as a conceptual framework.METHODS: Eighteen pediatric residents who completed global health experiences in Africa (9 categorical residents with 1-month elective, 9 global child health residents with 12-month training) participated in interviews that included a card-sort to solicit emotional responses consistent with the conceptual framework. Data in the form of interview transcripts were coded and analyzed according to principles of grounded theory.RESULTS: All pediatric residents, despite variable time abroad, reported a range of emotional responses on reentry to residency. Global child health residents felt disconnection and frustration more intensely than categorical residents, whereas categorical residents felt invigoration more intensely than global child health residents. Although residents met with program leadership after their return, no resident described these meetings as a formal debriefing, and few described a deliberate strategy for processing emotions on reentry.CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with reverse culture shock, pediatric residents felt a range of emotions as they move toward a steady state of acculturating back into their residency program. Residency programs might consider creating safety nets to help cultivate support for residents when they reenter training. WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT:Although nonphysician reentry transitions have been characterized in the literature, little is known about the reentry of residents after either shortterm (1-month elective) or long-term (12-month training) global health experiences abroad. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:Reverse culture shock may be a useful conceptual framework for understanding the range of emotions felt by pediatric residents when they reenter residency after global health experiences, particularly if these experiences were long term.

Background: Short-term global health electives (STGHEs) have become increasingly common, with evidence showing educational and clinical benefits for short-term learners (STLs). Despite increased recognition that STGHEs should be mutually beneficial for host sites and STLs, evidence demonstrating the impact on international host preceptors is lacking. Objectives: To understand international host preceptors’ perceptions regarding benefits and burdens of hosting STLs. Methods: Focus group discussions with a convenience sample of 10 of 18 eligible preceptors were conducted at pediatric STGHE sites in Malawi and Lesotho. Qualitative content analysis was performed to identify themes using a deductive-inductive approach. Findings: Common themes regarding benefits to preceptors included increased knowledge and resources for learning from STLs, broadened differential diagnoses, and the satisfaction of teaching. Regarding burdens, preceptors perceived that supervising STLs decreases efficiency. Preceptors identified the burden of having to intervene in instances that could lead to patient harm. Some preceptors perceived that STLs under-valued preceptors’ clinical decision-making in resource-limited contexts. Conclusions: Our findings emphasize the need for institutions to identify mutuality of benefits between STLs and host sites when developing STGHEs. Host preceptors identified robust pre-departure training for STLs, lengthened duration of STGHEs, and formal preceptor orientation as ways to enhance mutuality of benefits.