Discourses of student orientation to medical education programs

Background: Although medical students’ initial orientation is an important point of transition in medical education, there is a paucity of literature on the subject and major variations in the ways that different institutions orient incoming medical students to their programs. Methods: We conducted a discourse analysis of medical education orientation in the literature and on data from a survey of peer institutions’ approaches to orientation. Results: These two discourses of orientation had clear similarities, in particular, the critical role of ceremony and symbols, and the focus on developing professionalism and physician identities. There were also differences between them, in particular, in the way that the discourse in the literature focused on the symbolic and professional aspects of orientation; something we have called ‘cultural orientation’. Meanwhile, those who were responsible for orientation in their own institutions tended to focus on the practical and social dimensions. Conclusion: By examining how orientation has been described and discussed, we identify three domains of orientation: cultural, social, and practical. These domains are relatively distinct in terms of the activities associated with them, and in terms of who is involved in organizing and running these activities. We also describe orientation as a liminal activity system on the threshold of medical school where incoming students initially cross into the profession. Interestingly, this state of ambiguity also extends to the scholarship of orientation with only some of its aspects attracting formal enquiry, even though there is a growing interest in transitions in medical education as a whole. We hope, therefore, that this study can help to legitimize enquiry into orientation in all its forms and that it can begin to situate the role of orientation more firmly within the firmament of medical education practice and research

Should Physicians Have Facial Piercings?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess attitudes of patrons and medical school faculty about physicians with nontraditional facial piercings. We also examined whether a piercing affected the perceived competency and trustworthiness of physicians. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: Teaching hospital in the southeastern United States. PARTICIPANTS: Emergency department patrons and medical school faculty physicians. INTERVENTIONS: First, patrons were shown photographs of models with a nontraditional piercing and asked about the appropriateness for a physician or medical student. In the second phase, patrons blinded to the purpose of the study were shown identical photographs of physician models with or without piercings and asked about competency and trustworthiness. The third phase was an assessment of attitudes of faculty regarding piercings. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nose and lip piercings were felt to be appropriate for a physician by 24% and 22% of patrons, respectively. Perceived competency and trustworthiness of models with these types of piercings were also negatively affected. An earring in a male was felt to be appropriate by 35% of patrons, but an earring on male models did not negatively affect perceived competency or trustworthiness. Nose and eyebrow piercings were felt to be appropriate by only 7% and 5% of faculty physicians and working with a physician or student with a nose or eyebrow piercing would bother 58% and 59% of faculty, respectively. An ear piercing in a male was felt to be appropriate by 20% of faculty, and 25% stated it would bother them to work with a male physician or student with an ear piercing. CONCLUSIONS: Many patrons and physicians feel that some types of nontraditional piercings are inappropriate attire for physicians, and some piercings negatively affect perceived competency and trustworthiness. Health care providers should understand that attire may affect a patient's opinion about their abilities and possibly erode confidence in them as a clinician