Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global health threat and has placed an extraordinary demand on healthcare workers around the world. In this study, we aim to examine the prevalence of burnout and its associated factors and experience among Malaysian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic through an embedded mixed-method study design. We found that more than half of Malaysian healthcare workers in this sample experienced burnout. Direct involvement in COVID-19 screening or treatment, having a medical condition, and less psychological support in the workplace emerged to be the significant factors in personal-, work-, and patient-related burnout. Participants described their workloads, uncertainties caused by the pandemic, challenging work–family balance, and stretched workplace relationships as the sources of burnout. Exhaustion appeared to be the major symptom, and many participants utilized problem-focused coping to deal with the adversities experienced during the pandemic. Participants reported physical-, occupational-, psychological-, and social-related negative impacts resulting from burnout. As the pandemic trajectory is yet unknown, these findings provide early insight and guidance for possible interventions.

(1) Background: The ability to communicate with patients and their relatives is a crucial skill for a physician. Unfortunately, many physicians and medical students are not well-equipped in this area. Therefore, this study aims to better understand the views on critical components of physician-patient communication to improve their skills. (2) Methods: This qualitative study utilized focus group discussions (FGDs) and in-depth interviews (IDIs). Through a purposive sampling technique, 32 medical students and physicians from the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia (FMHS UPM) and Universiti Putra Malaysia Teaching Hospital (HPUPM), as well as patients and relatives from government and private hospitals or clinics were recruited. All sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically. (3) Results: Seven themes were identified: professionalism, content of communication, verbal, non-verbal and paraverbal communication skills, environment, and visual communication. Good eye contact, providing treatment plans, and ensuring patient privacy and confidentiality were emphasized by physicians and medical students. In comparison, patients and relatives focused on the prognosis of disease, physician’s empathy and advice, and physician’s skills in building rapport with their patients and relatives. (4) Conclusion: The critical components that were highlighted by both professionals and laymen in the study should be practiced to ensure effective communication between physician and patient. There were different expectations in terms of the content of information between both groups. Patients and relatives were more interested in the physician’s advice regarding their diet, care plans, physical activities, and daily routine. They were also focused on the prognosis of the disease, which indicates how quickly they would get better. Meanwhile, physicians and medical students were concentrating on management and treatment strategies, such as what additional procedures should be considered and what medications might work best for their patients. We also found that the patients and relatives had a lack of awareness on confidentiality issues. These findings provide an insight on the improvement of medical training and patient education to improve patient care. Patients have a right to privacy protection, and physicians should be well trained to carry out all procedures and treatment plans to ensure patients are treated with respect.

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) trajectory remains unknown, online learning (OL) has replaced face-to-face teaching strategies in education institutions. Research and training focus on harnessing educators, but less is understood at the students’ ends. This study examines the OL readiness components, self-regulation, enablers, and barriers to OL at home among medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic through an explanatory mixed-method study. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 178 students and an in-depth interview with 10 students from a public medical school in Malaysia. We found that while all students owned at least one learning device, 22.5% of the students did not have a learning space at home. 21.9% students did not have Wi-Fi access, and 11.2% did not receive mobile broadband coverage at home. Despite these barriers, students had a suitable OL self-regulation level. Significantly higher self-regulation was observed among pre-clinical year students, students with higher grades, and students who had designated learning space at home. We found that high-immediacy and low-bandwidth applications such as WhatsApp and Telegram, and YouTube as the most accessible and easiest platforms to navigate in OL. Our qualitative findings yielded a conceptual model of OL enablers at learners, educators, and institution levels. This framework may serve as one of the guides in faculty development planning and policymaking, especially in promoting a more socially inclusive OL.

In the practice of medicine, resilience has gained attention as on of the ways to address burnout. Qualitative studies have explored the concept of physician resilience in several contexts. However, individual qualitative studies have limited generalizability, making it difficult to understand the resilience concept in a wider context. This study aims to develop a concept of resilience in the context of physicians’ experience through a meta-synthesis of relevant qualitative studies. Using a predetermined search strategy, we identified nine qualitative studies among 450 participants that reported themes of resilience in developed and developing countries, various specialties, and stages of training. We utilized the meta-ethnography method to generate themes and a line-of-argument synthesis. We identified six key themes of resilience: tenacity, resources, reflective ability, coping skills, control, and growth. The line-of-argument synthesis identified resilient physicians as individuals who are determined in their undertakings, have control in their professional lives, reflect on adversity, utilize adaptive coping strategies, and believe that adversity provides an opportunity for growth. Resilient physicians are supported by individual and organizational resources that include nurturing work culture, teamwork, and support from the medical community and at home. Our findings suggest that resilience in physicians is dynamic and must be supported not only by physician-directed interventions but also by organization-directed interventions.

Purpose: Most of the resilience scales were developed for the non-medical population, therefore the purpose of this study was developing and validating a resilience scale for medical professionals – namely Medical Professionals Resilience Scale (MeRS). Methods: A questionnaire development and validation study was conducted. The resilience domains and items were identified and generated through a literature review. The content validation was carried out by content experts and the content validity index (CVI) was calculated. The face validation was performed by medical officers and the face validity index (FVI) was calculated. The final MeRS was administered to 167 medical officers, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis were performed to assess MeRS’s factorial structure and internal consistency. Results: Four domains with 89 items of medical professionals’ resilience were developed. Following that, the content and face validation was conducted, and a total of 41-items remained for construct validation. EFA extracted four factors, namely growth, control, involvement, and resourceful, with a total of 37 items. The items’ CVI and FVI values were more than 0.80. The final MeRS’s items had factor loading values ranged from 0.41 to 0.76, and the Cronbach’s alpha values of the resilience domains ranged from 0.72 to 0.89. Conclusions: MeRS is a promising scale for measuring medical professionals’ resilience as it showed good psychometric properties. This study provided validity evidence in terms of content, response process, and internal structure that supported the validity of MeRS in the measurement of resilience domains among medical professionals.