704 - Feasibility and Impact of Emotional Intelligence Training in Preclinical Medical Education

Publication Number: 2687.704

Emma J. Horowitz, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States; Abigail S. Kaminsky, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States; Mandeep S. Sidhu, Albany Medical College, Slingerlands, NY, United States; Mary E. Fay, Albany Medical College, Wynantskill, NY, United States; Gina Geis, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States; Leah D'Agostino, Albany Medical College, ALbany, NY, United States; William Bachman, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States; Suzanne Barry, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States; Barbara E. Ostrov, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, United States

Background: Emotional Intelligence (EI) includes self-awareness, empathy, decision-making, and stress management, all essential for effective medical practice. Higher EI in physicians correlates with better communication, patient outcomes, and lower burnout. Despite this, EI training is rarely part of medical education. To address this gap, a structured EI pilot program was created for first-year medical students to develop these skills early in training.

Objective: This study evaluated the feasibility and impact of a structured EI training program for first-year medical students. Our hypothesis was that participation would lead to measurable improvement in EI scores compared to non-participants.

Design/Methods: A multifaceted EI curriculum was developed and launched in July 2024 following IRB approval. The program included an EQ-i 2.0 assessment, six workshops, individualized coaching with physician EI coaches, and reflective writing. Of 111 students completing the baseline assessment, 50 were randomly selected and opted in, while 61 served as controls. Among participants, 46 of 50 (92%) completed the intervention. Post-assessments were completed by 31 of the intervention group (62%) and 11 of the control group (18%). Pre–post changes were analyzed using paired t-tests (intervention) and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (control). Between-group comparisons used independent-samples t-tests. Qualitative data came from workshop surveys, coaching reflections, and feedback sessions.

Results: Intervention participants showed significant within-group improvements (p < 0.05) across 11 of 15 EI composites, with the largest gains in total EI, self-regard, self-perception, stress tolerance, and decision-making. Empathy showed modest, non-significant change (Table 1). Between-group comparisons were not statistically different, though decision-making, self-regard, and reality testing approached significance (Figure 2). The control group showed no significant within-group changes for any EI composites or total scores (Table 1). Workshop surveys across six sessions (n=222) found 96.4% felt objectives were met and 91.9% rated sessions as valuable.

Conclusion(s): This pilot showed EI training can be integrated into the preclinical curriculum and is associated with meaningful gains across multiple EI domains for participants, while EI did not improve significantly for controls. The combination of workshops, coaching, and reflection was well received and aligned with targeted competencies. With refinement and expansion, EI training may enhance resilience, empathy, and effectiveness in future physicians.

Table 1: Emotional Intelligence Composite Scores Pre- and Post-Intervention
Table 1- Emotional Intelligence Composite Scores Pre- and Post-Intervention .pdfFor intervention group; independent-samples t-tests for between-group differences. p < .05 considered statistically significant. Pre-pilot assessment Ntotal = 111; Nintervention = 50, Ncontrol = 61). Post-pilot assessment Ntotal = 42; Nintervention = 31, Ncontrol = 11).

Figure 1: Change in Emotional Intelligence Composite Scores
Figure 1- Change in Emotional Intelligence Composite Scores.pdfBar chart showing mean pre- to post-intervention changes in emotional intelligence composites for control and intervention groups.