Faculty Bibliography

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

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: During the rapid onset of the pandemic, clinicians transitioned from traditional outpatient practice to telemedicine for triaging COVID-19 patients and providing routine care to patient panels. Telemedicine training and assessment had not been systematically incorporated into most residencies. In response, a scheduled Internal Medicine (IM) Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) was adapted to a telemedicineemphasized, virtual modality to become a just-in- time learning experience for trainees.
METHOD(S): Remote cases deployed on common web-based video conference platform included; (1) a potential COVID-19 triage, (2) educating on buprenorphine maintenance, (2) counselling on mammogram screening, and (3) addressing frustration with electronic health record documentation. Simulated Patients (SPs) rated residents on communication skills, patient activation and satisfaction, and case-specific telemedicine items. Analyses included a comparison of domain scores (mean % well done) for residents who participated in both the 2020 remote and 2019 in-person OSCEs, and a review of written resident feedback.
RESULT(S): Fewer than half (46%) of 2020's residents (n=23) performed well on the COVID-19 case's telemedicine skill domain. Residents excelled in using nonverbal communication to enrich on-camera communication (100%), but struggled with virtual physical exams (13%), gathering information (4%), and optimizing technology (4%). Residents expressed interest in more opportunity to practice telemedicine skills going forward. Residents' overall COVID-19 knowledge was fair (54% of items were rated as 'well done'). Fewer than half (45%) advised the SP that testing was not available at the time, but that he should call the city hotline for information, and about half (55%) provided quarantine/ home care instructions. In comparing 2020 (virtual) to 2019 (in-person) OSCE scores, residents who participated in both assessments (n=9) performed similarly on communication skills including information gathering (84% vs. 83%), and relationship development (93% vs. 92%), patient satisfaction (72% vs. 80%) and activation (65% vs. 66%). Patient education scores were significantly lower during the virtual OSCE (40% vs. 76%, P=.008).
CONCLUSION(S): Our reformulated OSCE accomplished three goals: (1) physically distancing residents from SPs, (2) providing residents the opportunity to practice critical telemedicine skills, and (3) alerting our educators to curricular improvement areas in virtual physical exam, patient education, gathering information and optimizing technology. Our methods are scalable at other institutions and have applications to the larger medical and clinical education community. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Describe challenges and barriers to effective communication and clinical skill utilization during televisits. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Understand resident physician practice patterns and communication regarding infectious disease

BACKGROUND: Performance-based assessment & feedback during medical training is essential for a successful transition before moving onto residency and independent clinical practice. Learners at New York University's School of Medicine (NYUSOM) participate in a routine comprehensive clinical skills examination (CCSE) that takes place at the tail end of medical school. During this exam, learners interact with standardized patients (SPs) and are rated on specific skills using a standardized checklist, measuring important clinical skills domains. NYUSOM has utilized the same assessment tool since 2005. To date, there is limited evidence on the tool's validity and ability to differentiate among students. We sought to provide evidence for it's reliability, validity, and generalizability.
METHOD(S): 1157 learners participated in the CCSE from 2011-2019 and were included in the analysis. Communication domain items assessed included patient education (3 items), relationship development (4 items), information gathering (6 items) and organization/ time management (3 items). Items were scored using a 3-point behaviorally-anchored scale (not, partly, or well done). In order to determine the degree to which the data mapped onto our theoretically-informed communication domains, we conducted a four-factor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) allowing for factors to correlate (oblique rotation) and using means and variance adjusted weighted-least squares estimation (WLSMV) in order to account for the ordered categorical nature of the communication items. Model fit was assessed using root mean square of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.08, comparative fit index (CFI) > 0.95, and standardized root mean square error (SRMR) <0.08.
RESULT(S): The model fit the data using RMSEA (0.04), CFI (0.98), and SRMR (0.05). All factors were significantly correlated with one another (p < 0.05), with the largest correlation between patient education and organization/ time management (0.86), and information gathering (0.77). The smallest correlation was between organization/ time management and information gathering (0.66). All items (factor loadings) significantly loaded on the factors they measured. Only one item had an insignificant threshold loading between partly and well done, suggesting this part of the response scale may be hard for SPs to differentiate between students with varying ability on this item. Each factor had at least one item that had a factor loading less than 0.7.
CONCLUSION(S): The analysis suggests each item on the communication checklist significantly measures domains they were designed to measure, and that items can be summated to compute overall scores. Domains had one item with a lower loading than the rest, suggesting these items may be measuring something different. Follow up measurement modeling and profile analysis is the next logical step in determining if there is an important sub-domain that identifies a student group operating differentially. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Understand clinical communication LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Describe communication measures

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: New York City was the epicenter of the COVID pandemic in the US during early 2020. NYU Langone Medical Center was one of many New York medical centers that experienced an unprecedented influx of patients. During the onset of the pandemic, clinic leadership identified, oriented, and rapidly deployed a COVID Army, consisting of non-hospitalist physicians, to meet the needs of this patient influx. Orientation and training included an hour-long session with an emphasis on the inpatient electronic medical record system and a plan for at the elbow assistance from senior hospitalists. Here, we share feedback from our providers on our capacity building process and use information gathered to offer specific lessons learned in planning for workforce mobilization.
METHOD(S): A 32-item survey was distributed from March-June of 2020 in order to assess the experiences of these ancillary physicians, all of which were NYU Langone providers. Items included a mix of Likert and open-ended questions on demographics and attitudes toward experiences on the COVID team.
RESULT(S): All 272 volunteers received a survey. 67% (n=183) responded. 84 (46%) were from the Department of Medicine, the remainder were primarily from surgical, pediatrics or obstetrics/gynecology. Respondents worked in combination ambulatory/inpatient practices (n=94; 52%) or outpatient only (n=85; 47%) (Mean years in practice: 7.18). 76% felt that the number of patients they were in charge of felt Just Right (average: 7). 10% rated the experience as challenging (n=17). On their perception of support and training, 94% and 63% rated the support and training they received as somewhat or very effective, respectively. 89% (n=99) and 96% (n=107) of supplemental attendings felt valued and valuable to their team, respectively. 87% of respondents identified as being willing to volunteer again. In review of open-ended feedback, we identified a series of themes surrounding areas for improvement. These include the need to 1) invest time into orientations, including training on EHR use, (2) clarify roles and workflow within each team up front, (3) balance team workload if possible, (4) keep teams updated on evolving policies and recommendations, (5) make team members feel valued and supported, and (6) ensure they have the right tools available.
CONCLUSION(S): Given what we have learned from our survey, the continued waxing and waning of community infection, and the unknown length and extent of the COVID pandemic, we recommend providing transparent leadership, frequent communication, and an educational series to ensure everyone is learning together. In addition, clarity is essential, and it is important to be specific in defining the exact roles of ancillary physicians. It is our hope that the lessons learned from our needs assessment can be applied to other hospitals currently in the throes of a surge of COVID inpatients. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #1: Identify best practices for preparing an ancillary workforce for patient surge. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Understand tools for quality patient care

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/UNASSIGNED:Telemedicine holds promise to bridge the transition of care between inpatient and outpatient settings. Despite this, the unique communication and technical skills required for virtual encounters are not routinely taught or practiced in graduate medical education (GME) programs. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To develop an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) case to assess residents' telemedicine-specific skills and identify potential gaps in our residency program's curriculum. Methods/UNASSIGNED:As part of a multi-station OSCE in 2019, we developed a case simulating a remote encounter between a resident and a recently discharged standardized patient. We developed an assessment tool comprising specific behaviors anchored to "not done," "partly done," and "well done" descriptors to evaluate core communication and telemedicine-specific skills. Results/UNASSIGNED:Seventy-eight NYU internal medicine residents participated in the case. Evaluations from 100% of participants were obtained. Residents performed well in Information Gathering and Relationship Development domains. A mean 95% (SD 3.3%) and 91% (SD 4.9%) of residents received "well done" evaluations across these domains. A mean 78% (SD 14%) received "well done" within Education/Counseling domain. However, only 46% (SD 45%) received "well done" evaluations within the Telemedicine domain; specific weak areas included performing a virtual physical examination (18% well done) and leveraging video to augment history gathering (17% well done). There were no differences in telemedicine-specific skill evaluations when stratified by training track or postgraduate year. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:We simulate a post-discharge virtual encounter and present a novel assessment tool that uncovers telemedicine-specific knowledge gaps in GME trainees.