Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE: Patient education is critical in ensuring patient compliance and good health outcomes. Fellows must be able to effectively communicate with their patients, delivering enough information for the patient to understand their medical problem and maximize patient compliance. We created an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with four liver disease cases to assess fellows' knowledge and ability to inform standardized patients about their clinical condition. METHODS: We developed four cases highlighting different aspects of liver disease and created a four station OSCE: hepatitis B, acute hepatitis C, new diagnosis of cirrhosis, and an end-stage cirrhotic non transplant candidate. The standardized patient (SP) with hepatitis B was minimizing the fact that she could not read English. The acute hepatitis C SP was a nursing student who is afraid that having hepatitis C might jeopardize her career. The SP with the new diagnosis of alcoholic cirrhosis needed to stop drinking, and the end-stage liver disease patient had to grapple with his advanced directives. Twelve fellows from four GI training programs participated. Our focus was to assess the fellows' knowledge about liver diseases and the ACGME competencies of health literacy, shared decision making, advanced directives and goals of care. The goal for the fellows was to communicate effectively with the SPs, and acknowledge that each patient had an emotionally charged issue to overcome. The SPs used a checklist to rate fellow's performance. Faculty and the SPs observed the cases and provided feedback. The fellows were surveyed on their performance regarding the case. RESULTS: The majority of fellows were able to successfully summarize findings and discuss a plan with the patient in the new diagnosis of cirrhosis (76.92%) and hepatitis C case (100%), but were less successful in the hepatitis B (30.77%) and end-of-life case (41.67%). Overall, a small percentage of fellows reflected that they did a good job (22-33%), except at the end-of-life case (67%). The fellows' greatest challenge was trying to cover a lot of information in a single outpatient visit. CONCLUSION: Caring for patients with liver diseases can be complex and time consuming. The patients and fellows' observations were discordant in several areas: for example. the fellows believed they excelled in the end-of-life case, but the SP thought only a small percentage of fellows were able to successfully summarize and discuss the plan. This discrepancy and others highlight important areas of focus in training programs. OSCEs are important to help the fellows facilitate striking the right balance of information delivery and empathy, and this will lead to better patient education, compliance, rapport, and satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: Opioid analgesics are effective and appropriate therapy for many types of acute pain. Epidemiologic evidence supports a direct relationship between increased opioid prescribing and increases in opioid use disorders and overdoses. OBJECTIVE: To tailor our residency curriculum, we designed and fielded an unannounced standardized patient (USP) case involving a patient with acute back pain who is requesting Vicodin (5/325 mg). We describe residents' case management and examine whether their management decisions, including opioid prescribing, were related to their core clinical skills. METHODS: Results are based on 50 (USP) visits with residents in 2 urban primary care clinics. Highly trained USPs portrayed a patient with acute lower back pain who was taking leftover Vicodin with effective pain relief but was running out. We describe how residents managed this case, using both USP report and chart review data, and compare summary clinical skills scores between those who prescribed Vicodin and those who did not. RESULTS: Of the 50 residents, 18 prescribed Vicodin (10-60 pills). Among those who did not prescribe (32/50), most (50%) prescribed ibuprofen. Eighty-three percent of the prescribers and 72% of nonprescribers ordered physical therapy (nonsignificant). Of the 18 prescribers, 13 documented checking the prescription monitoring database. Prescribers had significantly better communication scores than nonprescribers (relationship development: 80% vs. 58% well done, P = .029; patient education: 59% vs. 31% well done, P = .018). Assessment summary scores were also higher (60% vs. 46%) but not significantly (P = .060). Patient satisfaction and activation scores were higher in the prescribers than nonprescribers (71% vs. 39%, P = .004 and 48% vs. 26%, P = .034, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most Vicodin prescribers did not follow prescribing guidelines, and they demonstrated better communication and assessment skills than the nonprescribers. Results suggest the need to guide residents in using a systematic approach to prescribing opioids safely and to develop an acceptable alternative pain management plan when they decide against prescribing.

AIM: To assess first-year gastroenterology fellows' ability to address difficult interpersonal situations in the workplace using objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE). METHODS: Two OSCEs ("distracted care team" and "frazzled intern") were created to assess response to disruptive behavior. In case 1, a fellow used a colonoscopy simulator while interacting with a standardized patient (SP), nurse, and attending physician all played by actors. The nurse and attending were instructed to display specific disruptive behavior and disregard the fellow unless requested to stop the disruptive behavior and focus on the patient and procedure. In case 2, the fellow was to calm an intern managing a patient with massive gastrointestinal bleeding. The objective in both scenarios was to assess the fellows' ability to perform their duties while managing the disruptive behavior displayed by the actor. The SPs used checklists to rate fellows' performances. The fellows completed a self-assessment survey. RESULTS: Twelve fellows from four gastrointestinal fellowship training programs participated in the OSCE. In the "distracted care team" case, one-third of the fellows interrupted the conflict and refocused attention to the patient. Half of the fellows were able to display professionalism despite the heated discussion nearby. Fellows scored lowest in the interprofessionalism portion of post-OSCE surveys, measuring their ability to handle the conflict. In the "frazzled intern" case, 68% of fellows were able to establish a calm and professional relationship with the SP. Despite this success, only half of the fellows were successfully communicate a plan to the SP and only a third scored "well done" in a domain that focused on allowing the intern to think through the case with the fellow's guidance. CONCLUSION: Fellows must receive training on how to approach disruptive behavior. OSCEs are a tool that can assess fellow skills and set a culture for open discussion.

BACKGROUND: Training residents to effectively practice value-based care is challenging. We hypothesized that residents with better communication skills would order fewer unnecessary tests and prescribe more appropriate care. We used a USP case of a patient with uncontrolled asthma to examine the relationship between value-based care and communication skills. METHODS: A 25 year-old female USP presented as a new patient to a medicine resident's clinic, reporting asthma since childhood with worsening symptoms over the past few months. At the time of the visit, she was using her albuterol inhaler multiple times daily, without any additional asthma treatment, and was unsure whether she was using it properly. Data was collected using two forms of assessment: a post-visit USP checklist and a systematic review of the corresponding clinic note to examine treatment recommendations including referrals and quality of documentation. The USP checklist measured communication, patient education, and assessment skills. Each response option included descriptive behavioral anchors and was rated as not done, partly done, or well done. Domain scores were calculated as percent items rated well done. RESULTS: 141 USP visits were made from 2009 to 2016 with a mean visit length = 88 min, SD= 28 min (range: 40 to 180 min). Almost all residents (92%) evaluated the patient's asthma with a pulmonary examination. The most common treatment prescribed was albuterol and an inhaled steroid, with or without a spacer (79%). The majority of residents (53%) did not order any additional studies; 21% ordered one study, and 26% ordered two or more studies. Study orders fell into one of three categories: gold (appropriate/recommended: PFTs, flu shot, HIV), grey (pulmonary consult, HCG), or inappropriate (TSH, A1C). Across the 141 visits, 129 studies were ordered; 46% were gold, 5% were grey, and 49% were inappropriate. The most common study ordered was a PFT (31%). 87% of single study orders were gold, but 92% of multiple orders included at least one inappropriate study. Residents who did not order any studies had significantly higher patient education and counseling skills than residents who ordered one or more studies (54% vs 34%, p = 0.00) and were more likely to explain how to correctly use an inhaler than residents who ordered one or more studies (48% vs 27%, p = 0.01). These residents also had significantly higher management and treatment skills (61% vs 39%, p = 0.00) and overall communication skills (68% vs 55%, p = 0.01). There were no significant differences between groups in medications prescribed or in quality of documentation. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication skills may contribute to valuebased care through appropriate patient education and ordering of fewer inappropriate studies. Rigorous curricula and assessment of resident's patient education skills should be in place to help both patients and health care system achieve value-based care

BACKGROUND: All physicians need to be skilled at diagnosing, treating, and managing depression. We designed an unannounced standard patient (USP) case to assess residents' clinical skills in addressing depression and explored how those skills are associated with residents' general clinical skills in order to design targeted curriculum on depression. METHODS: The USP was a 26 y.o. male presenting as a new patient to a clinic complaining of fatigue and problems sleeping. Goals of the case were to diagnose a common presentation of depression and make a treatment/follow-up plan. The USP was trained to have a positive PHQ 2 &PHQ 9, family history of depression, and be willing to engage in medication and/or therapy if offered. A post-visit checklist was used by the SPs to assess communication, patient education, and assessment skills using behaviorally anchored items rated as not done, partly done, or well done. A systematic chart review was conducted to examine treatment, quality of documentation, and referrals. Case fidelity was checked by audiotape and confirmed by PHQ 9 score in the EHR. Evidence based treatment was defined as prescribing an SSRI and/or providing a psychiatric referral; if neither of those, scheduling follow-up for within 2 weeks. RESULTS: 122 residents saw the USP case from 2009-2015. Mean visit length = 45 min, SD 25 (14 to 183 min). The patient was screened for depression with a PHQ 2 in 93% of visits; 82% also had a PHQ 9. Overall, 77 residents (63%) provided appropriate treatment: 8% prescribed an SRRI, 23% provided a referral, 19% did both, 7% prescribed a sleep aid and <2 week follow-up, and 43% provided a combination of these treatments. 45 residents (37%) did not provide appropriate treatment: 27 (60%) prescribed a sleep aid and follow-up >2 weeks and 18 (40%) provided no treatment/referral and follow-up >2 weeks. There were no differences in exploration of medical history or substance use, but 83% of residents who treated appropriately had a PHQ 9 compared to 62% of residents who did not treat appropriately. 71% also included depression on the problem list compared to 13%of residents who did not treat appropriately. Residents who treated appropriately had significantly better clinical skills assessed by the USP including: overall communication (71% vs. 54%, p = 0.00), information gathering (72% vs. 55%, p = 0.01), relationship development (75% vs. 60%, p = 0.03), patient education (55% vs. 21%, p = 0.00), and patient activation skills (33% vs. 13%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although almost all residents obtained the relevant information, only about 50% of residents diagnosed depression. PHQ 9 appears to be associated with providing more effective treatment, supporting the importance of health system screening protocols. Residents' communication and depression-specific patient education and activation skills seem to be related to how they identify and manage depression, suggesting that interventions to build these skills may lead to higher quality care

NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES: To address rising education costs, physician shortages, and the need for educational reform, several medical schools have developed accelerated 3-year MD programs. In 2013, NYU School of Medicine began its new 3-year MD program with guaranteed acceptance into residency upon graduation. Using the AAMC's 13 Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entry into Residency (CEPAER) framework, we designed an immersive 4-hour simulated "Night on Call" (NOC) experience to compare performance of our first graduating cohort of fifteen 3-year MD students (3A), with third (3T) and fourth year (4T) students in the traditional 4-year MD program. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 73 medical students (39 women, age 26.5 (+2.6) years; 36 '3T', 12 '3A', 25 '4T') completed an IRB-approvedNOC at our simulation center 4 weeks prior to the end of their third or final year of medical school. DESCRIPTION: We developed NOC to measure competence and entrustment across all 13 CEPAERs from the perspective of patients, nurses, and attendings. During the simulation, a medical student rotated through a series of 8 clinical coverage scenarios including: 4 standardized patient (SP) cases with varying degrees of complexity, each of which require answering a call from a standardized nurse (SN), evaluating an SP with the SN in the room, making immediate management decisions and writing a coverage note; a phone call to an experienced clinician to orally present (OP) the case; formulation of a clinical question and finding the most appropriate evidence-based medicine (EBM) answer using digital library resources; a clinical vignette (CV) to test ability to recognize a pre-entrustable peer; and a handoff (HO) of 4 cases to a peer (a senior medical student). CEPAERs assessments based on validated tools included communication, physical exam, patient education and interprofessional teamwork skills assessed by an SP and SN, and clinical reasoning based on notes, OP, EBM, CV, HO. Each rater also provided an entrustment judgment. EVALUATION: Although overall student performance improved across cases and some interesting individual performance patterns emerged, there were no significant differences across the three groups in the core competency and entrustment measures evaluated across various NOC activities. DISCUSSION/REFLECTION/LESSONS LEARNED: The 13 CEPAERs are meant to define what students should be expected to perform (without direct supervision) prior to entering residency. Our results, based on multiple rater perspectives, suggest that our cohort of 3A students is as prepared for residency as their 4T counterparts

BACKGROUND: The AAMC has identified 13 Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) that all entering residents should be expected to perform on day 1 of residency without direct supervision regardless of specialty choice. We developed an immersive, Night on call (NOC) simulation to understand the measure of entrustment of all 13 Core EPAs from the perspective of patients, nurses, attendings, and peers. METHODS: NOC is a 4-hour simulation, during which a medical student rotates through a series of authentic clinical coverage scenarios including: 4 standardized patient (SP) cases with varying degrees of complexity, each of which require first answering a call from a standardized nurse, (SN), then evaluating a SP with the SN in the room, making immediate management decisions and writing a coverage note; a phone call to an attending (Attn, an experienced clinician) to orally present (OP), and discuss the case, formulation of a clinical question and finding a best answer using digital library resources (EBM), a test of ability to recognize a pre-entrustable peer, and a handoff of 4 cases to a peer (HOff, portrayed by an senior medical student). Competency assessments were based on validated tools where available. Each rater provided an entrustment judgment. This included 9 raters providing a total of 16 entrustment judgments: 4 SPs and 3 SNs (1 rating competency and 1 rating communication each), 1 Attn based on OP, 1 peer rating based on the HOff (1 item each). Raters were trained in both case portrayal and rating reliability. This study is IRB approved. After exploring the relationships among competency measures and entrustment judgements, to test the hypothesis that NOC measures trustworthiness of our near graduates, we conducted a one-factor (entrustment) confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with the 16-entrustment items allowing the ratings from the same raters and between raters on the same case to correlate. The CFA was conducted with a means and variance adjusted weighted-least squares estimation (WLSMV) to take the ordinal distributions of the entrustment items into account. RESULTS: 73 medical students (39 women; Age 26.5 (+2.6) years) completed NOC. The one-factor CFA model fit the data (chi² = 155.27, df = 112, p < .001, CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.07, p > 0.05). All but 2 of the 16 factor loadings were greater than 0.3, (Attn factor loading = 0.23 and the SP ratings from the first clinical case of NOC sequence (0.21)). CONCLUSIONS: A single-factor model with 16measures fit the entrustment framework within an ecologically valid simulated workplace suggesting that an individual student's clinical trustworthiness is measurable across discrete work activities. This work provides an assessment framework for the educational handoff from medical school to residency to ensure quality of care and patient safety

BACKGROUND: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) and milestones are expert judgments made based on many formative assessments. Their validity is dependent on the number of assessments but attention is increasingly being paid to having a "fair" sample of observations equally distributed across residents and contexts. OSCEs provide such a consistent, fair sample of behavior assessed under controlled conditions but have mostly used been used to provide granular skills feedback. We explore how faculty judge the "entrustability" of residents based on observing OSCE cases and then how these entrustments relate to OSCE skills performance. METHODS: In an 11-case OSCE for primary care residents (n = 25; PGY1-3), SPs rated skills in communication (information gathering, relationship development, education/counseling), assessment, patient education (case-specific), physical exam, professionalism, treatment plan, patient satisfaction and patient activation. Summary scores were calculated as%items rated well done (vs not or partly done; internal consistency > .72). Faculty observers then judged how much supervision the resident would need in actual practice to handle the case: 1-requires direct supervision, 2-requires indirect supervision, 3-ready for unsupervised practice, or 4- can supervise others. Mean entrustment rating across cases was correlated with clinical skills. RESULTS: Mean entrustment =2.46 (SD .37), falling between requires indirect supervision and ready for unsupervised practice. On average, residents were judged to need direct supervision in .40 cases (SD .65), indirect supervision in 4.76 (SD 2.03), ready for unsupervised practice in 2.92 (SD 1.80), and able to supervise others in 1.07 cases (SD 1.15) with PGY1 residents needing direct and indirect supervision in more cases than PGY2 and 3 (p = .037). Associations between OSCE performance and faculty entrustment ranged from essentially zero (communication sub-domains of information gathering and education/counseling; case-specific patient education; patient satisfaction) to negative (communication sub-domain of relationship development r = -.25, p = .16; professionalism r = -.21, p = .22) to positive (case-specific assessment, r = .35, p = .07; physical exam r = .30, p = .13; treatment plan r = .40, p = .04; patient activation r = .51, p = .008). Associations between skills performance and entrustment ratings varied by case. CONCLUSIONS: OSCEs provide a valuable opportunity for faculty to make entrustment judgments based on observing the same, complete encounter across many trainees. Entrustment judgments appear to be capturing elements of competence related to but different from SP assessments of performance, including especially "bottom line" aspects of practice such as assessment, physical exam, treatment plans and patient activation. Interestingly, we consider patient activation skills to be an "educationally sensitive patient outcome" i because both teachable and associated with patient outcomes and our results support the importance of this skill set