Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Vaccine hesitancy is challenging for clinicians and of increasing concern since COVID-19 vaccination rollout began. Standardized patients (SPs) provide an ideal method for assessing resident physicians' current skills, providing opportunity to practice and gain immediate feedback, while also informing evaluation of curriculum and training. As such, we designed and implemented an OSCE station where residents were tasked with engaging and educating a vaccine-hesitant patient. AIM/OBJECTIVE:Describe residents' vaccine counseling practices, core communication and interpersonal skills, and effectiveness in meeting the objectives of the case. Explore how effectiveness in overcoming vaccine hesitancy may be associated with communication and interpersonal skills in order to inform educational efforts. SETTING/METHODS:Annual OSCE at a simulation center. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:106 internal medicine residents (51% PGY1, 49% PGY2). PROGRAM DESCRIPTION/METHODS:Residents participated in an annual residency-wide, multi-station OSCE, one of which included a Black, middle-aged, vaccine-hesitant male presenting for a routine video visit. Residents had 10 min to complete the encounter, during which they sought to educate, explore concerns, and make a recommendation. After each encounter, faculty gave residents feedback on their counseling skills and reviewed best practices for effective communication on the topic. SPs completed a behaviorally anchored checklist (30 items across 7 clinical skill domains and 2 measures of trust in the vaccine's safety and resident) which will inform future curriculum. PROGRAM EVALUATION/RESULTS:Fifty-five percent (SD: 43%) of the residents performed well on the vaccine-specific education domain. PGY2 residents scored significantly higher on two of the seven domains compared to PGY1s (patient education/counseling-PGY1: 35% (SD: 36%) vs. PGY2: 52% (SD: 41%), p = 0.044 and activation-PGY1: 37% (SD: 45%) vs. PGY2: 59% (SD: 46%), p = 0.016). In regression analyses, education/counseling and vaccine-specific communication skills were strongly, positively associated with trust in the resident and in the vaccine's safety. A review of qualitative data from the SPs' perspective suggested that low performers did not use patient-centered communication skills. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This needs assessment suggests that many residents needed in-the-moment feedback, additional education, and vaccine-specific communication practice. Our program plans to reinforce evidence-based practices physicians can implement for vaccine hesitancy through ongoing curriculum, practice, and feedback. This type of needs assessment is replicable at other institutions and can be used, as we have, to ultimately shed light on next steps for programmatic improvement.

BACKGROUND:The need to engage adults, age 65 and older, in clinical trials of conditions typical in older populations, (e.g. hypertension, diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer's disease and related dementia) is exponentially increasing. Older adults have been markedly underrepresented in clinical trials, often exacerbated by exclusionary study criteria as well as functional dependencies that preclude participation. Such dependencies may further exacerbate communication challenges. Consequently, the evidence of what works in subject recruitment is less generalizable to older populations, even more so for those from racial and ethnic minority and low-income communities. METHODS:To support capacity of research staff, we developed a virtual, three station simulation (Group Objective Structured Clinical Experience-GOSCE) to teach research staff communication skills. This 2-h course included a discussion of challenges in recruiting older adults; skills practice with Standardized Participants (SPs) and faculty observer who provided immediate feedback; and debrief to highlight best practices. Each learner had opportunities for active learning and observational learning. Learners completed a retrospective pre-post survey about the experience. SP completed an 11-item communication checklist evaluating the learner on a series of established behaviorally anchored communication skills (29). RESULTS:In the research staff survey, 92% reported the overall activity taught them something new; 98% reported it provided valuable feedback; 100% said they would like to participate again. In the SP evaluation there was significant variation: the percent well-done of items by case ranged from 25-85%. CONCLUSIONS:Results from this pilot suggest that GOSCEs are a (1) acceptable; (2) low cost; and (3) differentiating mechanism for training and assessing research staff in communication skills and structural competency necessary for participant research recruitment.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Virtual urgent care (VUC) provides real-time evaluation, triage, and treatment of low-acuity medical problems; however, VUC physicians have varying levels of telemedicine training. We created a workplace-based experiential onboarding program that deployed standardized patients (SPs) into a VUC clinic to evaluate and deliver feedback to independently practicing physicians, providing quality assurance and identifying areas for improvement. Methods/UNASSIGNED:SPs evaluated communication, disease-specific, and telemedicine skills by observing behaviors. We surveyed participants to evaluate the program. Results/UNASSIGNED:= 34%) well done-highlighting specific behaviors most ripe for improvement. All queried participants indicated that this simulation improved communication and telemedicine skills. Discussion/UNASSIGNED:This workplace-based experiential onboarding program uncovered knowledge gaps within telemedicine skills and patient education domains. Identification of these gaps can help drive new virtual care curricula.

BACKGROUND:Traditional introductory point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) courses are resource intensive, typically requiring 2-3 days at a remote site, consisting of lectures and hands-on components. Social distancing requirements resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic led us to create a novel hybrid course curriculum consisting of virtual and in-person components. METHODS:Faculty, chief residents, fellows and advanced practice providers (APPs) in the Department of Medicine were invited to participate in the hybrid curriculum. The course structure included 4 modules of recorded lectures, quizzes, online image interpretation sessions, online case discussions, and hands-on sessions at the bedside of course participant's patients. The components of the course were delivered over approximately 8 months. Those participants who completed a minimum of 3 modules over the year were invited for final assessments. Results from the hybrid curriculum cohort were compared to the year-end data from a prior traditional in-person cohort. RESULTS:Participant knowledge scores were not different between traditional (n = 19) and hybrid (n = 24) groups (81% and 84%, respectively, P = 0.9). There was no change in POCUS skills as measured by the hands-on test from both groups at end-of-course (76% and 76%, respectively, P = 0.93). Confidence ratings were similar across groups from 2.73 traditional to 3.0 hybrid (out of possible 4, P = 0.46). Participants rated the course highly, with an average overall rating of 4.6 out 5. CONCLUSIONS:A hybrid virtual and in-person POCUS course was highly rated and as successful as a traditional course in improving learner knowledge, hands-on skill and confidence at 8 months after course initiation. These results support expanding virtual elements of POCUS educational curricula.

We describe an educational intervention for neurology residents aimed at developing feedback skills. An objective structured clinical examination case was designed to simulate the provision of feedback to a medical student. After the simulated case session, residents received structured, individualized feedback on their performance and then participated in a group discussion about feedback methods. Survey data were collected from the standardized medical student regarding residents' performance and from residents for assessments of their performance and of the OSCE case. This manuscript aims to describe this educational intervention and to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach for feedback skills development.

OBJECTIVE:Curricula designed to teach and assess the communication skills of pediatric residents variably integrates the parent perspective. We compared pediatric residents' communication skills in an objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) case as assessed by Family Faculty (FF), parents of pediatric patients, versus standardized patients (SP). METHODS:Residents participated in an OSCE case with a SP acting as a patient's parent. We compared resident performance as assessed by FF and SP with a behaviorally-anchored checklist. Items were rated as not done, partly done or well done, with well-done indicating mastery. The residents evaluated the experience. RESULTS:42 residents consented to study participation. FF assessed a lower percentage of residents as demonstrating skill mastery as compared to SP in 19 of the 23 behaviors. There was a significant difference between FF and SP for Total Mastery Score and Mastery of the Competency Scores in three domains (Respect and Value, Information Sharing and Participation in Care and Decision Making). The majority of residents evaluated the experience favorably. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Involving parents of pediatric patients in the instructive and assessment components of a communication curriculum for pediatric residents adds a unique perspective and integrates the true stakeholders in parent-physician communication.

Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) provide a controlled, simulated setting for competency assessments, while unannounced simulated patients (USPs) measure competency in situ or real-world settings. This exploratory study describes differences in primary care residents' skills when caring for the same simulated patient case in OSCEs versus in a USP encounter. Data reported describe a group of residents (n=20) who were assessed following interaction with the same simulated patient case in two distinct settings: an OSCE and a USP visit at our safety-net clinic from 2009 to 2010. In both scenarios, the simulated patient presented as an asthmatic woman with limited understanding of illness management. Residents were rated through a behaviourally anchored checklist on visit completion. Summary scores (mean % well done) were calculated by domain and compared using paired sample t-tests. Residents performed significantly better with USPs on 7 of 10 items and in two of three aggregate assessment domains (p<0.05). OSCE structure may impede assessment of activation and treatment planning skills, which are better assessed in real-world settings. This exploration of outcomes from our two assessments using the same clinical case lays a foundation for future research on variation in situated performance. Using both assessments during residency will provide a more thorough understanding of learner competency.