Faculty Bibliography

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM OR QUESTION (ONE SENTENCE): In order to describe quality improvement (QI) methods for health systems, we report on 10-years of using Unannounced Standardized Patient (USP) visits as the core of a program of education, training, and improvement in a system serving vulnerable patients in partnership with an academic medical center. LEARNING OBJECTIVES 1: Consider methods for supporting learning healthcare systems LEARNING OBJECTIVES 2: Identify performance data to improve care DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM/INTERVENTION, INCLUDING ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT (E.G. INPATIENT VS. OUTPATIENT, PRACTICE OR COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS): The IOM defines a Learning Healthcare System (LHCS) as one in which science, informatics, incentives and culture are aligned for continuous improvement and innovation and where best practices are seamlessly embedded in the delivery process and new knowledge is captured as an integral by-product of the delivery experience. As essential as electronic health records are to LHCS, such data fail to capture all actionable information needed to sustain learning within complex systems. USPs are trained actors who present to clinics, incognito, to portray standardized chief complaints, histories, and characteristics. We designed and delivered USP visits to two urban, safety net clinics, focusing on assessing physician, team, and clinical micro system functioning. MEASURES OF SUCCESS (DISCUSS QUALITATIVE AND/OR QUANTITATIVEMETRICSWHICHWILL BE USEDTOEVALUATE PROGRAM/INTERVENTION): Behaviorally anchored assessments are used to assess core clinical skills (e.g., communication, information gathering, patient education, adherence to guidelines, patient centeredness, and patient activation). Team functioning assessments include professionalism and coordination. Micro system assessment focuses on safety issues like identity confirmation, hand washing, and navigation. Data from these visits has been provided to the residency, primary care teams, and to leadership and have been used to drive education, team training, and QI. FINDINGS TO DATE (IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO STATE FINDINGS WILL BE DISCUSSED): 1111 visits have been sent to internal medicine and primary care residents and their teams/clinics. At the resident level, needs for additional education and training in depression management, opioid prescribing, smoking cessation, and patient activation were identified and informed education. Chart reviews found substantial variation in ordering of labs and tests. At the team level, USPs uncovered needs for staff training, enhanced communication, and better processes for eliciting and documenting Social Determinants of Health (SDoH). Audit/feedback reports on provider responses to embedded SDoH combined with targeted education/resources, were associated with increased rates of eliciting and effectively responding to SDoH. In the early COVID wave, USPs tested clinic response to a potentially infectious patient. Currently, USPs are being deployed to understand variability in patients' experience of telemedicine given the rapid transformation to this modality. Finally, generalizable questions about underlying principles of medical education and quality improvement are being asked & answered using USP data to foster deeper understanding of levers for change. KEY LESSONS FOR DISSEMINATION (WHAT CAN OTHERS TAKE AWAY FOR IMPLEMENTATION TO THEIR PRACTICE OR COMMUNITY): A comprehensive USP program can provide unique insights for driving QI and innovation and help sustain a LHCS

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems rose to the challenges of COVID-19 by creating or expanding telehealth programs to ensure that patients could access care from home. Traditionally, though, physicians receive limited formal telemedicine training, which made preparedness for this transition uneven. We designed a survey for General Internal Medicine (GIM) physicians within our diverse health system to describe experiences with providing virtual patient care; with the ultimate goal of identifying actionable recommendations for health system leaders and medical educators.
METHOD(S): Surveys were sent to all faculty outpatient GIM physicians working at NYU Langone Health, NYC Health + Hospitals/Bellevue and Gouverneur, and the VA NY Harbor Health System (n=378) in May & June of 2020. Survey items consisted of Likert and open-ended questions on experience with televisits (13 items) and attitudes toward care (24 items). Specific questions covered barriers to communication over remote modalities.
RESULT(S): 195/378 (52%) responded to the survey. 96% of providers reported having problems establishing a connection from the patient's end while 84% reported difficultly establishing connection on the provider's end. Using interpreter services over the phone was also problematic for providers, with 38% reporting troubles. Regarding teamness, 35% of physicians found it difficult to share information with healthcare team members during virtual visits and 42% found it difficult to work collaboratively with team members, both when compared to in-person visits. When subdivided, 24% of private and 40% of public providers found info sharing more difficult (p<0.04). 31% of private providers and 45% of public found team collaboration more difficult (ns). Physicians also identified challenges in several domains including physical exams (97%), establishing relationships with new patients (74%), taking a good history (48%), and educating patients (35%). In thematic analysis of open-ended comments, themes emerged related to technological challenges, new systems issues, and new patient/provider communication experiences. Positives noted by physicians included easier communication with patients who often struggle with keeping in-person appointments, easier remote monitoring, and a more thorough understanding of patients' home lives.
CONCLUSION(S): Provider experience differences were rooted in the type of technology employed. Safety-net physicians conducted mostly telephonic visits while private outpatient physicians utilized video visits, despite both using the same brand of electronic medical record system. As we consider a new normal and prolonged community transmission of COVID-19, it is essential to establish telemedicine training, tools, and protocols that meet the needs of both patients and physicians across diverse settings. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Describe challenges and barriers to effective communication and clinical skill utilization during televisits LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Conceptualize recommendations for educational curricula and health service improvement areas

LEARNINGOBJECTIVES 1: Interpersonal /Communication Skill: 1) Identify communication skills needed to recruit older adults LEARNING OBJECTIVES 2: 2) Assess feasibility of GOSCEs to enhance recruitment skills in RAs. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 18 (5 male, 13 female) Research Assistants (RAs) at an urban hospital who recruit older adults for clinical trials. DESCRIPTION: Increasing older adults' participation in clinical trials is urgently needed. We developed a remote, three station simulation (Group Objective Structured Clinical Exam - GOSCE) to teach RAs communication skills. This 2-hour course included a discussion of challenges in recruiting older adults; skills practice with Standardized Participants (SPs); and a debrief to review experiences, highlight best practices. After discussion, RAs rotated (3 per group) through the stations, each with SP and faculty observer who provided immediate feedback. Thus, learners had opportunities for active and observational learning.Scenarios were: 1) an older white woman with hearing impairment; 2) an older white woman and family member together; and 3) an older Black man mistrustful due to history of racism in medical research. SPs completed behaviorally anchored checklists (11 communication skills across all cases, and 5-7 case-specific questions). Learners completed a 36- item survey of self-assessed change in skill after the workshop; insights on recruitment practice; and educational value. EVALUATION: The communication checklist across all cases included: relationship development (5 items, mean of 58% well done (range: 50-75%), patient education (3 items, 44% (42-58%)), patient satisfaction (2 items, 54% (50-58%)), and information gathering (1 item, 92%). Seventeen RAs completed the survey, 100% felt the workshop provided valuable feedback and taught relevant material, 88% would participate again and 52%reported that the workshop improved their recruitment skills. All RAs reported encountering situations similar to hearing impairment and family member cases, and the majority rated the cases as high in educational value. Just 45% reported experiencing a case similar to the Black male case, and 100% rate it as high in educational value. Key points identified by RAs included the value of building a trusting relationship with potential subjects, recognizing possible barriers to communication early on and addressing these directly in a supportive and respectful style. DISCUSSION / REFLECTION / LESSONS LEARNED: Remote GOSCEs are a feasible mechanism for training RAs in subject recruitment focused on the unique needs of older adults. Responses to the RA survey suggest that GOSCEs are feasible for training RAs in simulated clinical scenarios with which participants are familiar and unfamiliar. SP assessment of RAs identified areas for further reinforcement to improve recruitment skills. This innovation is a feasible, high yield strategy for training research staff. It is highly adaptable to the specific recruitment needs and skills of a clinical trials and will add to the literature on educating RAs

BACKGROUND: The transition from medical school to residency is characterized by an abrupt transition of learning needs and goals. Coaching is a promising intervention to support individual learning and growth trajectories of learners. It is uncommon for medical school faculty to have undergone training as coaches. We explored our faculty's perceptions and skills after instituting a new coaching program.
METHOD(S): Faculty advisors (N=12) and GME (N=16) participated in a coaching development program and in community of practice meetings where challenging coaching scenarios were shared. GME faculty also participated in a Group Objective Structured Clinical Exam (GOSCE) to practice and receive feedback on their skills. Peer-faculty observers and resident raters used behaviorally grounded checklists to assess faculty performance. We conducted 2 focus groups: 1) UME advisors engaged in longitudinal coaching (n=9) and 2) GME faculty participating in the coaching development program (n=8) to better understand how faculty make sense of and put into practice these new coaching roles and skills.
RESULT(S): Simple thematic coding showed that both groups emphasized the blurring of the many roles they serve when interacting with trainees and struggled with recognizing both which hat to wear (role to adopt) and which skills to call upon in specific situations. UME advisors who have dedicated advising/coaching roles reported assuming multiple roles at different times with their same students. Many of the GME coaches serve as Associate Program Directors, and described adopting a coaching frame of reference (mentality) and requiring external reinforcement for coaching skills. Some reported realizing after the fact that coaching would have been a valuable approach. Faculty newer to their role felt more successful in engaging in coaching mindset and coaching. Faculty were curious about how trainees would feel about this approach and anticipated that some would appreciate this more than others. 12 faculty participated in a three station Coaching GOSCE. Both resident raters and faculty peer raters suggested faculty coaches were able to establish trust and engage in authentic listening. Coaches negotiated the tension between empathetic listening with supporting goal-setting. Residents provided slightly lower ratings than peer observers on coaches' ability to ask questions and assume a coachee- focused agenda.
CONCLUSION(S): Medical educators may benefit from obtaining coaching skills, but deliberate training in how these skills complement, and differ, from existing skills requires both didactic and experiential learning. Cultivating a community of practice and offering opportunities for deliberate practice, observation and feedback is essential for medical educators to achieve mastery as coaches. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Identify and perform appropriate learning activities to guide personal and professional development (PBL) LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Understand and apply core longitudinal coaching skills (Professionalism)

BACKGROUND: NYU uses the same 14-item checklist for assessing medical student communication skills across our curriculum, which includes highquality Objective Structured Clinical Skills Exams throughout the first three years of medical school: a 3-station Introductory Clinical Experience OSCE (ICE), a 3-station end-of-clinical skills OSCE (Practice of Medicine; POM); and an 8-station, high- stakes OSCE (Comprehensive Clinical Skills Exam; CCSE) after core clerkship. We describe how skills change throughout school and explore how patterns vary by cohort (class) in ways that could be explained by admissions criteria, measurement quality, and/or curriculum changes.
METHOD(S): Three domains are assessed: Info gathering (6 items), relationship development (5 items); and patient education & counseling (3 items). Checklist items use a 3-point scale (not done, partly, well done) with behavioral anchors. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) exceeds .75 for all subdomains and across all years. Domains are supported by Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Mean average % well done was calculated across cases and individuals for each subdomain in an OSCE and compared over the OSCEs and between 8 classes of medical school students entering from 2009 to 2016 (graduating 2013 to 2020) (n=1569).
RESULT(S): Cohorts showed similar patterns communication skills trajectories - improvement over time. Despite changes in admissions criteria and processes, cohorts did not differ in terms of demographics, undergraduate GPA, or MCAT scores. Variability in scores decreased in all cohorts over time while communication improved. Patient education & counseling was significantly and substantially lower than other domains. In terms of cohort effects, communication scores for the entering class of 2013 at the start of medical school (ICE OSCE) were significantly higher than the previous 4. At the end of MS2, scores were similar for cohorts for info gathering and relationship development domains (and high, mean range=77-87% well done) but patient education & counseling varied: Improvement from the 1st to 3rd cohort and then decline for the last 5 cohorts. Within the CCSE (8-station pass/fail, MS3), communication scores increased steadily across entering classes, especially from cohort 4 on. These changes over time and between cohorts were mapped onto a priori descriptions of curricular, measurement and admission changes.
CONCLUSION(S): Our cohort data showed interesting and complex patterns. This study reinforces some limitations of linking curriculum to performance (e.g., no direct measures of the curriculum in terms of content, process and intensity over time, limited data on what makes cohorts different, variable measurement over time, and being unable to control for broader trends likely to influence both cohort and time effects) while also demonstrating the promise of longitudinal perspectives on the development of core competencies. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Understand cohort performance in relation to curricular trends. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Describe variation in performance

Background/UNASSIGNED:During the rapid onset of the pandemic, clinicians transitioned from traditional outpatient practice to virtual modalities for providing routine care to patient panels. Like training programs nationwide, telemedicine training and assessment had not been systematically incorporated into our residency. In response, a scheduled Internal Medicine (IM) Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) was adapted to a remote modality to become virtual care-focused learning experience for trainees and to provide valuable feedback to educators. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Standardized Patients (SPs) rated residents on their communication (including information gathering, relationship development and patient education), patient activation and satisfaction, and telemedicine skills. Analyses included a comparison of domain scores for residents who participated in both the 2020 remote and 2019 in-person OSCEs, and a review of written resident comments about the virtual OSCE. Results/UNASSIGNED: = .008). Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Our reformulated OSCE accomplished 3 goals including; (1) physically distancing residents from SPs per COVID regulations, (2) providing residents with the opportunity to practice critical virtual visit skills, and (3) alerting our educators to curricular improvement areas. Our methods are useful for other institutions and have applications to the larger medical education community.

BACKGROUND:Neurologists need to be adept at disclosing prognosis and breaking bad news. Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) allow trainees to practice these skills. METHODS:In 2017, in conjunction with the NYU School of Medicine Simulation Center, neurology faculty designed an OSCE case in which a resident had to inform a standardized patient (SP) her father had severe global hypoxic ischemic injury. The residents were surveyed on the experience using a Likert scale from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). The SP completed a behavioral anchored checklist and marked items as "not done," "partly done," or "well done". RESULTS:57 third and fourth year neurology residents completed the case from 2018 to 2020, 54 (95%) of whom completed the post-OSCE survey. Residents reported feeling moderately prepared for the simulation (mean Likert score 3.7/5), and thought their performance was average (3.4/5). Overall, they found the case to be very helpful (4.6/5). The residents performed well in the realms of maintaining professionalism (64% rated "well done"), developing a relationship (62% rated "well done"), and information gathering (61% rated "well done"). There was room for improvement in the realms of providing education and presenting the bad news (39% and 37% rated "partly/not done," respectively). CONCLUSIONS:OSCE cases can be used to teach neurology trainees how to discuss prognosis and break bad news. Feedback about this simulation was positive, though its efficacy has yet to be evaluated and could be a future direction of study.

INTRODUCTION: Clinicians caring for critically-ill patients must be able to discuss prognosis and deliver bad news. To teach Neurology residents how to do this, we designed an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) case in which trainees discussed prognosis with a standardized patient (SP).
METHOD(S): In 2017, in conjunction with the NYU School of Medicine Simulation Center, neurology faculty designed an OSCE case in which a resident was tasked with informing a SP her father had severe global hypoxic ischemic injury. The SP was instructed to assess the resident's ability to 1) explain the neurologic findings and 2) to respond to an emotional outburst. A neurology attending observed the encounter via one-way glass. After a 10-minute encounter, the resident was provided 5 minutes of feedback. The residents were surveyed on how prepared they felt for the OSCE, how useful it was, how they rated their performance, and how much they learned from the activity via a Likert scale from 1 (worst) to 5 (best) and free text response. The SP completed a behavioral anchored checklist to assess the residents' ability to gather information, develop a relationship, provide education and counseling, present bad news, and maintain professionalism.
RESULT(S): 57 third and fourth year neurology residents completed the case from 2018-2020, 54 (95%) of whom completed the post-OSCE survey. Residents reported feeling moderately prepared (mean Likert score 3.7/5) and rated their performance as average (3.4/5). Overall they found the case to be very helpful (4.6/5). Several reported difficultly with 1) addressing a complex medical case in a limited amount of time 2) reacting appropriately to an emotional family member and 3) avoiding medical jargon. The SP reported that residents performed well in the realms of non-verbal behavior enriched communication, being non-judgmental, not interrupting, acknowledging emotion, and avoiding medical jargon. Areas in which there was room for improvement included collaborating with the SP to decide upon next steps, identifying a support system, and asking "what is going through your mind right now?".
CONCLUSION(S): OSCE cases can be used to teach clinicians how to discuss prognosis and break bad news. Feedback about this simulation was positive, however its efficacy has yet to be evaluated

OBJECTIVE:New York City was the epicenter of the outbreak of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States. As a large, quaternary care medical center, NYU Langone Medical Center was one of many New York medical centers that experienced an unprecedented influx of patients during this time. Clinical leadership effectively identified, oriented, and rapidly deployed a "COVID Army," consisting of non-hospitalist physicians, to meet the needs of the patient influx. We share feedback from our providers on our processes and offer specific recommendations for systems experiencing a similar influx in the current and future pandemics. METHODS:To assess the experiences and perceived readiness of these physicians (n = 183), we distributed a 32-item survey between March and June of 2020. Thematic analyses and response rates were examined to develop results. RESULTS:Responses highlighted varying experiences and attitudes of our frontline physicians during an emerging pandemic. Thematic analyses revealed a series of lessons learned, including the need to (1) provide orientations, (2) clarify roles/workflow, (3) balance team workload, (4) keep teams updated on evolving policies, (5) make team members feel valued, and (6) ensure they have necessary tools available. CONCLUSIONS:Lessons from our deployment and assessment are scalable at other institutions.

BACKGROUND:Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming widely adopted with increasing accessibility of courses. Little is known about the optimal design of the introductory course or longitudinal training programs targeting hospitalists that are critical to success. METHODS:Hospitalists at four academic sites participated in a two-day introductory course and a longitudinal phase comprising clinical POCUS practice, clip uploading with online feedback, hands-on teaching, and monthly ultrasound conferences. Assessments were performed immediately before and after the two-day course and after 1 year. RESULTS:Knowledge increased from baseline to post two-day course (median score 58 and 85%, respectively, p < 0.001) and decreased slightly at 1 year (median score 81%, p = 0.012). After the two-day introductory course, the median score for hands-on image acquisition skills, the principal metric of participant success, was 75%. After 1 year, scores were similar (median score 74%). Confidence increased from baseline to post two-day course (1.5 to 3.1 on a 4 point Likert scale from Not at all confident (1) to Very confident (4), p < 0.001), and remained unchanged after 1 year (2.73). Course elements correlating with a passing score on the final hands-on test included number of clip uploads (r = 0.85, p,0.001), attendance at hands-on sessions (r = 0.7, p = 0.001), and attendance at monthly conferences (r = 0.50, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS:The I-ScaN POCUS training program increased hospitalist knowledge, skill and confidence with maintained skill and confidence after 1 year. Uploading clips and attending hands-on teaching sessions were most correlative with participant success.