Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Medical students are often unprepared for social challenges in caring for safety net patients. We aim to evaluate and chronicle the evolution of a pre-clinical elective alongside medical disparities curriculum. DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:Medical students designed the course to supplement clinical training on care of vulnerable patients. From 2011-2015, there have been 80 first-year medical student participants, five cohorts of second-year course leaders, and two supporting faculty advisors for this 10-12 session evening elective. RESULTS:Students (n=67) rated the course extremely highly (ranging from 4.4-4.6 on a five-point Likert scale). Medical students reported having significantly more knowledge of underserved populations after taking the course (difference=0.72, SE=0.16, P <0.001). Career interests and attitudes toward health disparities remained strong after taking the course. CONCLUSIONS:This student-created elective equipped participants with improved knowledge in caring for underserved patients and contributed to the incorporation of health disparities in medical curriculum. [Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2016-10.asp].

OBJECTIVE: To assess relationships between primary care work conditions, physician burnout, quality of care, and medical errors. METHODS: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of data from the MEMO (Minimizing Error, Maximizing Outcome) Study. Two surveys of 422 family physicians and general internists, administered 1 year apart, queried physician job satisfaction, stress and burnout, organizational culture, and intent to leave within 2 years. A chart audit of 1795 of their adult patients with diabetes and/or hypertension assessed care quality and medical errors. KEY RESULTS: Women physicians were almost twice as likely as men to report burnout (36% vs 19%, P < .001). Burned out clinicians reported less satisfaction (P < .001), more job stress (P < .001), more time pressure during visits (P < .01), more chaotic work conditions (P < .001), and less work control (P < .001). Their workplaces were less likely to emphasize work-life balance (P < .001) and they noted more intent to leave the practice (56% vs 21%, P < .001). There were no consistent relationships between burnout, care quality, and medical errors. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is highly associated with adverse work conditions and a greater intention to leave the practice, but not with adverse patient outcomes. Care quality thus appears to be preserved at great personal cost to primary care physicians. Efforts focused on workplace redesign and physician self-care are warranted to sustain the primary care workforce.

BACKGROUND: Difficult patient encounters in the primary care office are frequent and are associated with physician burnout. However, their relationship to patient care outcomes is not known. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of difficult encounters on patient health outcomes and the role of physician dissatisfaction and burnout as mediators of this effect. DESIGN: A total of 422 physicians were sorted into 3 clusters based on perceived frequency of difficult patient encounters in their practices. Patient charts were audited to assess the quality of hypertension and diabetes management and preventive care based on national guidelines. Summary measures of quality and errors were compared among the 3 physician clusters. RESULTS: Of the 1384 patients, 359 were cared for by high-cluster physicians (those who had a high frequency of difficult encounters), 871 by medium-cluster physicians, and 154 by low-cluster physicians. Dissatisfaction and burnout were higher among physicians reporting higher frequencies of difficult encounters. However, quality of patient care and management errors were similar across all 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Physician perception of frequent difficult encounters was not associated with worse patient care quality or more medical errors. Future studies should investigate whether other patient outcomes, including acute care and patient satisfaction, are affected by difficult encounters.

CONTEXT: Little is known about the influence of the primary care workplace on patient care. Assessing physician opinion through focus groups can elucidate factors related to safety and error in this setting. METHOD: During phase 1 of the Minimizing Error, Maximizing Outcome (MEMO) Study, 9 focus groups were conducted with 32 family physicians and general internists from 5 areas in the upper Midwest and New York City. RESULTS: The physicians described challenging settings with rapidly changing conditions. Patients are medically and psychosocially complex and often underinsured. Communication is complicated by multiple languages, time pressure, and inadequate information systems. Complex processes of care have missing elements including medication lists and test results. Physicians are pressed to be more productive, and key administrative decisions are made without their input. Targeted areas to improve safety and reduce error included teamwork, aligned leadership values, diversity, collegiality, and respect. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians clearly described positive and negative workplace factors related to safety and error. The themes suggest that systems of care and their dynamic nature warrant attention. Enhancing positive and ameliorating negative cultures and processes of care could bring real benefits to patients, physicians, and ambulatory office settings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to assess medical students' ability to care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients and to identify potential deficiencies in medical school curricula pertaining to this care. METHODS: Between March 1 and April 15, 2004, third- and fourth-year medical students at a metropolitan medical school were sent an e-mail requesting participation in a confidential on-line survey of 64 quantitative questions designed to assess their ability to care for LGBT patients. RESULTS: A total of 248 of 320 (77.5%) students responded. Medical students with greater clinical exposure to LGBT patients reported more frequent sexual history taking with LGBT patients, had more positive attitude scores, and possessed higher knowledge scores than students with little or no clinical exposure. Overall, on the 13-item attitude survey, the mean was 4.15 (5 = most positive, SD = .55, range 1.86-5.00), indicating a desire and willingness to provide health care to LGBT patients. The mean score on the 14-item knowledge test was 60% (SD = .12) correct. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students with increased clinical exposure to LGBT patients tended to perform more comprehensive histories, hold more positive attitudes toward LGBT patients, and possess greater knowledge of LGBT health care concerns than students with little or no clinical exposure