Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Moral distress, which occurs when the ethically correct action cannot be taken because of internal or external constraints, is associated with depression, burnout, and the desire to leave the healthcare profession among healthcare workers. This study compares internal medicine (IM) residents’ experiences of moral distress while caring for patients with COVID-19 in the year prior to and during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:This is a mixed methods prospective observational cohort study that enrolled IM residents on a rolling basis beginning December 2018. Moral distress was evaluated via the validated Moral Distress Score-Revised (MDS-R) and Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MDD-HP) and open-ended questions every 4-months via online surveys and through five resident focus groups. The moral distress scores (MDS) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared using paired t-tests. Transcripts and free text were independently coded by investigators and analyzed by major themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: < .05). Qualitive findings included the exacerbation of existing moral distress and the emergence of new drivers of moral distress, including personal protective equipment, visitor policies, lack of moral framework, and tension between protecting one’s own health and caring for others. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this preliminary analysis suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing experiences of moral distress and brought to light new and different morally distressing situations for trainees. This analysis of the impact of the pandemic is valuable not only for identifying leverage points for intervention, but also for informing future crisis preparedness and cultivating moral resilience in trainees and the healthcare workforce. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-025-01274-6.

BACKGROUND:Among the alternative solutions being tested to improve access to genetic services, chatbots (or conversational agents) are being increasingly used for service delivery. Despite the growing number of studies on the accessibility and feasibility of chatbot genetic service delivery, limited attention has been paid to user interactions with chatbots in a real-world health care context. OBJECTIVE:We examined users' interaction patterns with a pretest cancer genetics education chatbot as well as the associations between users' clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, chatbot interaction patterns, and genetic testing decisions. METHODS:We analyzed data from the experimental arm of Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services, a multisite genetic services pragmatic trial in which participants eligible for hereditary cancer genetic testing based on family history were randomized to receive a chatbot intervention or standard care. In the experimental chatbot arm, participants were offered access to core educational content delivered by the chatbot with the option to select up to 9 supplementary informational prompts and ask open-ended questions. We computed descriptive statistics for the following interaction patterns: prompt selections, open-ended questions, completion status, dropout points, and postchat decisions regarding genetic testing. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationships between clinical and sociodemographic factors and chatbot interaction variables, examining how these factors affected genetic testing decisions. RESULTS:Of the 468 participants who initiated a chat, 391 (83.5%) completed it, with 315 (80.6%) of the completers expressing a willingness to pursue genetic testing. Of the 391 completers, 336 (85.9%) selected at least one informational prompt, 41 (10.5%) asked open-ended questions, and 3 (0.8%) opted for extra examples of risk information. Of the 77 noncompleters, 57 (74%) dropped out before accessing any informational content. Interaction patterns were not associated with clinical and sociodemographic factors except for prompt selection (varied by study site) and completion status (varied by family cancer history type). Participants who selected ≥3 prompts (odds ratio 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.91; P=.03) or asked open-ended questions (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96; P=.04) were less likely to opt for genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS:Findings highlight the chatbot's effectiveness in engaging users and its high acceptability, with most participants completing the chat, opting for additional information, and showing a high willingness to pursue genetic testing. Sociodemographic factors were not associated with interaction patterns, potentially indicating the chatbot's scalability across diverse populations provided they have internet access. Future efforts should address the concerns of users with high information needs and integrate them into chatbot design to better support informed genetic decision-making.

Background Overuse and misuse of antibiotics is an urgent healthcare problem and one of the key factors in antibiotic resistance. Validated clinical prediction rules have shown effectiveness in guiding providers to an appropriate diagnosis and identifying when antibiotics are the recommended choice for treatment. Objective We aimed to study the relative ability of registered nurses using clinical prediction rules to guide the management of acute respiratory infections in a simulated environment compared to practicing primary care physicians. Design We evaluated a case-based simulation of the diagnosis and treatment for acute respiratory infections using clinical prediction rules. As a secondary outcome, we examined nursing self-efficacy by administering a survey before and after case evaluations. Participants Participants included 40 registered nurses from three academic medical centers and five primary care physicians as comparators. Participants evaluated six simulated case studies, three for patients presenting with cough symptoms and three for sore throat. Key Results Compared to physicians, nurses determined risk and treatment for simulated sore throat cases using clinical prediction rules with nurses having 100% accuracy in low-risk sore throat cases versus 80% for physicians. We found great variability in the accuracy of the risk level and appropriate treatment for cough cases. Nurses reported slight increases in self-efficacy from baseline to post-case evaluation suggesting further information is needed to understand correlation. Conclusions Clinical prediction rules used by nurses in sore throat management workflows can guide accurate diagnosis and treatment in simulated cases, while cough management requires further exploration. Our results support the future implementation of automated prediction rules in a clinical decision support tool and a thorough examination of their effect on clinical practice and patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Health equity is receiving increased attention in medical education. However, guidance is often lacking on how to integrate health equity into routine medical education. Journal club presents an opportunity to deepen medical educators' and learners' understanding of health equity principles and use it as a lens through which to critically appraise the literature. AIM/OBJECTIVE:We present a health equity framework, iteratively co-created by faculty and learners, that can be applied in a journal club setting. SETTING/METHODS:Academic medical center in New York City, USA. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Faculty, residency program directors, medical students, and residents. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION/METHODS:Authors developed the health equity journal club framework during a medical student selective course. Learner and faculty applied the framework to journal club articles; their feedback informed revisions. Framework domains included authorship, ethics, methodology, language, peer review, and references. PROGRAM EVALUATION/RESULTS:Learner evaluations were overall positive, and 86% (n = 13) of responding residency program directors (n = 15) across 15 departments who were surveyed plan to use the framework moving forward. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:A health equity journal club framework applied to critical appraisal of the literature may facilitate health equity as a routine part of medical education. Co-creating the framework proved vital to inclusion of learner voices.

Uncontrolled hypertension is common and frequently related to inadequate adherence to prescribed medications, resulting in suboptimal blood pressure control and increased healthcare utilization. Although healthcare providers have the opportunity to improve medication adherence, they may lack the tools to address adherence at the point of care. This study aims to assess the usability of a digital tool designed to improve medication adherence and blood pressure control among patients with hypertension who are not adherent to therapy. By evaluating usability, the study seeks to refine the tool's design, underscore the role of technology in managing hypertension, and provide insights to inform clinical decisions.We performed qualitative usability testing of an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated intervention with medical assistants (MAs) and primary care providers (PCPs) from a large integrated health system. Usability was assessed with these end-users using the "think aloud" and "near live" approaches. This evaluation was guided by two frameworks: the End-User Computing Satisfaction Index (EUCSI) and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Interviews were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.Thematic saturation was reached after usability testing was performed with 10 participants, comprising 5 PCPs and 5 MAs. The study identified several strengths within the content, format, ease of use, timeliness, accuracy, and usefulness of the tool, including the user-friendly content presentation, the usefulness of adherence information, and timely alerts that fit into the workflow. Challenges centered around alert visibility and specificity of information.Leveraging the two conceptual frameworks (TAM and EUCSI) to test the usability of the medication adherence tool was helpful. The tool's several strengths and opportunities for improvement were found. The resulting suggestions will be used to support the enhancement of the design for optimal implementation in a clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Medication nonadherence is present in nearly half of patients with hypertension but is underrecognized in clinical care. Data linkages between electronic health records and pharmacies have created opportunities for scalable assessment of medication adherence at the point of care. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To test the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention that identified patients with uncontrolled hypertension and medication nonadherence using linked electronic health record-pharmacy data combined with team-based care to address adherence barriers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:TEAMLET (Leveraging Electronic Health Record Technology and Team Care to Address Medication Adherence) was a pragmatic, 2-arm, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted between October 2022 and November 2024 in 10 primary care sites in New York. The study included adults with uncontrolled hypertension and low medication adherence, defined as proportion of days covered (PDC) less than 80%. Data analysis was performed from November 2024 to January 2025. INTERVENTION/UNASSIGNED:The intervention consisted of the following: (1) automated identification of patients with medication nonadherence at the time of the visit; (2) prompting of medical assistants to screen for barriers to adherence; (3) clinical decision support alerting the primary care physicians and nurse practitioners to barriers to adherence; and (4) adherence discussion between the primary care physician or nurse practitioner and the patient. The comparator was usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was change in PDC from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 1726 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.2 [13.9] years; 887 [51.4%] female), the mean (SD) baseline PDC was 33.2% (30.5%) overall (32.4% [30.4%] in the intervention group and 34.0% [30.6%] in the control group). The mean (SD) PDC at 12 months was 51.1% (39.5%) for the intervention group and 53.1% (39.6%) for the control group. No difference was found in the change in PDC from baseline to 12 months between the intervention and control groups (mean [SD] absolute change in PDC, 18.5 [41.1] vs 18.2 [40.9] percentage points, respectively; adjusted difference, -0.15 percentage point; 95% CI, -4.06 to 3.76 percentage points). Change in systolic blood pressure and patients who became adherent (PDC ≥80%) at 12 months were also similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this pragmatic trial, an intervention that combined team-based primary care with automated identification of patients with antihypertensive medication nonadherence did not lead to improvements in adherence or blood pressure. TRIAL REGISTRATION/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05349422.

IMPORTANCE:Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted ambient documentation technologies that use audio from clinic visits to generate documentation are being deployed across hospital systems to optimize clinical note writing and reduce administrative burden. However, little is known about optimal approaches to engage patients in informed consent for these tools. OBJECTIVES:To explore clinician and patient experiences with consent processes and examine the association between the use of ambient documentation tools and the patient-clinician relationship. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This study was conducted from March 1 to December 31, 2024, in ambulatory practices across specialties in a large urban academic health center as part of an ongoing operational quality improvement initiative. Participants included clinicians and patients participating in an operational proof-of-concept exploration of ambient documentation technology. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:A pragmatic, sequential, inductive-deductive qualitative evaluation was conducted of informed consent contexts, processes, and challenges among ambulatory clinicians and patients exposed to ambient documentation technology. Evaluation included site visits, clinical observations, clinician interviews, and patient surveys to explore perceptions and challenges related to consent. RESULTS:A total of 121 ambient documentation pilot users included 18 clinicians (mean [SD] years of practice, 18.6 [100]; 10 men [55.6%]) and 103 patients (mean [SD] age, 37 [12.5] years; 65 women [63.1%]). The most common consent approach was a verbal patient-clinician conversation prior to an individual encounter. Patients and clinicians had a spectrum of comfort with ambient technology; 77 patients (74.8%) reported being comfortable or very comfortable with their physician using ambient documentation. Patient trust, detail in the consent discussion, and intended tool use were associated with patient comfort and intent to consent. Technical understanding was associated with comfort with consent conversations: when provided basic information about the technology, 84 patients (81.6%) consented; this decreased to 57 patients (55.3%) when details about AI features, data storage, and corporate involvement were disclosed. Perceived benefits included reduced documentation burden, improved decision-making, and enhanced communication. Concerns included data security, legal liability, cognitive impacts, and equity. When asked about responsibility for medical errors linked to ambient documentation, 66 patients (64.1%) held physicians accountable; for data security breaches, 79 patients (76.7%) believed vendors should be responsible. Participants suggested a flexible consent model with digital touchpoints, education, nonclinical staff support, and opt-out options. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In this quality improvement study of 121 pilot users of AI-assisted ambient documentation technology, informed consent relied primarily on verbal conversations that varied based on time, knowledge, and the patient-clinician relationship. A flexible, multimodal approach-including education, time to discuss risks and benefits, digital resources, nonclinical staff involvement, and clear opt-out options-may improve consent processes and support broader acceptance of ambient documentation tools.

The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a rapid expansion of telemedicine across the United States, expanding access to video-based services but also raising concerns about equitable access, use, and experience among minority populations. This mixed-methods scoping review quantitatively describes patterns of video-based telemedicine utilization and qualitatively evaluates factors impacting utilization among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a comprehensive literature search across six databases for studies published between January 2020 and March 2023. Eligible studies reported on telehealth or telemedicine use, specifically video-based visit utilization among racial/ethnic minorities. Reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and synthesized findings using an integrated mixed-methods approach. Of 1801 studies, 77 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, a majority were published in metropolitan coastal areas, and most were heterogeneous in their definition of telemedicine and utilization. Quantitatively, 33 studies (42.9%) reported increased use of video-based telemedicine, 29 (37.7%) reported decreased use, and 15 (20%) reported variable use across racial/ethnic subgroups. Most studies assessed disparities among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic/Latinx populations (73 and 66 studies, respectively), while fewer examined disparities among other minority populations (45 studies). Factors associated with telemedicine adoption included patient- and community-level digital access barriers, low organizational digital capacity and infrastructure, implicit bias, and inadequate provider education and training. Identified facilitators included trust and awareness of telemedicine, adequate provider training, cultural and linguistic adaptations, targeted internet subsidies, and telemedicine reimbursements. Video-based telemedicine utilization among racial/ethnic minorities during the COVID-19 pandemic was heterogeneous, influenced by individual, systemic, and implementation factors. Disparities were most pronounced among Asians and other minority populations. Despite increased attention and efforts to address access barriers, our findings highlight the need for more targeted, culturally and structurally tailored interventions to improve digital inclusion.