Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Hospital and ambulatory care systems are rapidly building their virtual care capacity in response to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The use of resident trainees in telemedicine is one area of potential development and expansion. To date, however, training opportunities in this field have been limited, and residents may not be adequately prepared to provide high-quality telemedicine care. AIM/OBJECTIVE:This study evaluates the impact of an adapted telemedicine Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) on telemedicine-specific training competencies of residents. SETTING/METHODS:Primary Care Internal Medicine residents at a large urban academic hospital. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION/METHODS:In March 2020, the New York University Grossman School of Medicine Primary Care program adapted its annual comprehensive OSCE to a telemedicine-based platform, to comply with distance learning and social distancing policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. A previously deployed in-person OSCE on the subject of a medical error was adapted to a telemedicine environment and deployed to 23 primary care residents. Both case-specific and core learning competencies were assessed, and additional observations were conducted on the impact of the telemedicine context on the encounter. PROGRAM EVALUATION/RESULTS:Three areas of telemedicine competency need were identified in the OSCE case: technical proficiency; virtual information gathering, including history, collateral information collection, and physical exam; and interpersonal communication skills, both verbal and nonverbal. Residents expressed enthusiasm for telemedicine training, but had concerns about their preparedness for telemedicine practice and the need for further competency and curricular development. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Programs interested in building capacity among residents to perform telemedicine, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, can make significant impact in their trainees' comfort and preparedness by addressing key issues in technical proficiency, history and exam skills, and communication. Further research and curricular development in digital professionalism and digital empathy for trainees may also be beneficial.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Microaggressions are connected to broader conceptualizations of the impact of implicit bias and systems of inequity. The body of evidence supporting the need for more-open discussions in medical education about race, racism, and their impact on health disparities continues to grow. Some have advocated for the importance of bringing anti-racist pedagogy into medical education curricula, which involves explicitly attempting to move beyond people's comfort zones and acknowledging that discomfort can be a catalyst for growth. To discuss the intent and impact of microaggressions in health care settings and how we might go about responding to them, we developed a workshop for third-year undergraduate medical students within a longitudinal undergraduate medical education diversity and inclusion curriculum. Methods/UNASSIGNED:= 154). Prior to the workshop, the students were asked to anonymously submit critical incident reports on any microaggressions experienced or witnessed to develop case studies for problem-based learning. Teaching modalities included lecture, problem-based learning with case studies, pair and share, and facilitated small- and large-group debriefs. Results/UNASSIGNED:The session was evaluated using a 4-point Likert scale to assess students' comfort in learning about the information presented. Ninety-eight percent felt confident in identifying microaggressions, and 85% felt confident in interrupting microaggressions when they occur. Discussion/UNASSIGNED:This personalized workshop exposes students to microaggressions personally experienced by colleagues with an attempt to interrupt them using empathy, awareness, and communication techniques.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDoH) play a significant role in health outcomes, but little is known about care teams' attitudes about addressing SDoH. Our safety-net clinic has begun to implement SDoH screening and referral systems, but efforts to increase clinical responses to SDoH necessitates an understanding of how providers and clinical teams see their roles in responding to particular SDoH concerns.
METHOD(S): An annual survey was administered (anonymously) to clinical care teams in an urban safety-net clinic from 2017-2019, asking about ten SDoH conditions (mental health, health insurance, food, housing, transportation, finances, employment, child care, education and legal Aid). For each, respondents rated with a 4-point Likert-scale whether they agreed that health systems should address it (not at all, a little, somewhat, a great deal). They also indicated their agreement (using strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, somewhat agree, strongly agree) with two statements 1) resources are available for SDoH and 2) I can make appropriate referrals.
RESULT(S): 232 surveys were collected (103 residents, 125 faculty and staff (F/S), 5 unknown) over three years. Of note, mental health (84%) and health insurance (79%) were seen as very important for health systems to address, with other SDoH items seen as very important by fewer respondents. They reported little confidence that the health system had adequate resources (51%) and were unsure how to connect patients with services (39%). When these results were broken out by year, we found the following: In 2017 (n=77), approximately 35% of respondents thought the issues of employment, childcare, legal aid, and adult education should be addressed "a little," but in 2018 (n=81) and 2019 (n=74) respondents found the health system should be more responsible, with over 35% of respondents stating that these four issues should be addressed "somewhat" by health systems. In addition, half of respondents in 2019 felt that financial problems should be addressed "a great deal," up from 31% in 2017. Across all years, food, housing, mental health, and health insurance were seen as SDoH that should be addressed "a great deal". It is of note that respondents across all years reported limited understanding of referral methods and options available to their patients.
CONCLUSION(S): Many of the SDoH conditions were seen by respondents as outside the purview of health systems. However, over the three years, more members increased the number of SDoH conditions that should be addressed a "great deal." Responses also indicated that many of the team members do not feel prepared to deal with "unmet social needs". Additional examination of clinic SDoH coding, referral rates, resources, and team member perspectives will deepen our understanding of how we can cultivate a culture that enables team members to respond to SDoH in a way that is sensitive to their needs and patient needs

Members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community experience marginalization, bias, and discrimination, including in the world of academic medicine. People who are transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) experience further marginalization compared to individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer. According to a recent survey, more than half of medical students who are TGNB chose not to disclose their gender identities during training due to fears of discrimination, feeling a lack of support, and concerns about future career options. Academic medicine has historically pathologized TGNB individuals, perpetuating discrimination structurally and reinforcing discriminatory behaviors in peers and faculty. In this Perspective, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the challenges that administrators and educators face in creating a learning environment that is inclusive of TGNB trainees. They outline opportunities for change and provide strategies to address administrative and educational challenges, including those related to institutional climate, policies, data collection, physical spaces, health care, the curriculum, mentoring, and the evaluation of TGNB trainees. Finally, the authors issue a call to action for medical educators and administrators to create environments in which trainees who are TGNB can fulfill their primary mission: to learn the practice of medicine.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The published literature on education about transgender health within health professions curricula was previously found to be sporadic and fragmented. Recently, more inclusive and holistic approaches have been adopted. We summarize advances in transgender health education. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A 5-stage scoping review framework was followed, including a literature search for articles relevant to transgender health care interventions in 5 databases (Education Source, LGBT Source, MedEd Portal, PsycInfo, PubMed) from January 2017 to September 2019. Search results were screened to include original articles reporting outcomes of educational interventions with a transgender health component that included MD/DO students in the United States and Canada. A gray literature search identified continuing medical education (CME) courses from 12 health professional associations with significant transgender-related content. Results/UNASSIGNED:Our literature search identified 966 unique publications published in the 2 years since our prior review, of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Novel educational formats included interdisciplinary interventions, post-residency training including CME courses, and online web modules, all of which were effective in improving competencies related to transgender health care. Gray literature search resulted 15 CME courses with learning objectives appropriate to the 7 professional organizations who published them. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Current transgender health curricula include an expanding variety of educational intervention formats driven by their respective educational context, learning objectives, and placement in the health professional curriculum. Notable limitations include paucity of objective educational intervention outcomes measurements, absence of long-term follow-up data, and varied nature of intervention types. A clear best practice for transgender curricular development has not yet been identified in the literature.