Faculty Bibliography

Background: Considerable resources are put into training physicians to be effective providers after residency. Practicing physicians are generally assumed to be more effective and more efficient than resident physicians who are still undergoing training. We capitalize on a unique opportunity to test that hypothesis using the controlled methodology of Unannounced Standardized Patients (USPs), Standardized Patients sent into clinical environments to systematically assess provider skills in the context of a standardized clinical scenario. Due to last minute scheduling changes, a small sample of attending physicians ended up seeing USPs we had intended to send to residents. In this study, we report on comparisons between how these attending physicians performed in terms of their patient centeredness, patient activation, assessment, and communication skills in comparison to residents.
Method(s): 6 USP visits were delivered to primary care clinics in an urban safety net hospital from 2009 to 2015. Of those 700+ visits, visits were completed inadvertently with 16 attendings. We selected the 16 attendings with at least 4 years of post-graduate experience and then matched them with 2 resident visits based on hospital, time period, and USP visit type (n=32 residents). In all visits, USPs completed a behav-iorally anchored post-visit checklist that assessed patient centeredness (4 items), patient activation (2 items), visit-specific assessment (10 items), and communication skills including information gathering (4 items), relationship development (5 items) and patient education (3 items). Items were rated as not done or partially done vs. well done and summary scores were calculated as % well done. Mean scores for attendings and matched residents were compared using t-tests.
Result(s): Resident and attending scores on patient centeredness (68% vs 73%), patient activation (44% vs 38%), assessment (53% vs 51%), patient education (49% vs 52%), information gathering (71% vs 78%) and relationship development (70% vs 73%) did not significantly differ (p>.05). Nor did we see any substantial differences in variances or find any outliers.
Conclusion(s): In our matched sample of residents and attendings, there were no significant differences by training level for any of the assessed clinical skills. While we viewed the inadvertent scheduling of USP visits with attendings as an opportunity to investigate the impact of training, our study is limited by the small sample size and whether we were able to create good matches. Findings may reflect ceiling effects (our checklists are too hard) or expertise-reversal effects (experts can skip some elements of the interaction and still arrive at the correct diagnosis and treatment plan). Further research, if our mistakenly-assessed attending sample increases, could explore the influence of PGY level and of patient load as attendings carry substantially heavier patient panels and see more (and probably more complex) patients per day then residents

Background: Diagnostic tests account directly for 5% of healthcare costs, but influence decisions constituting 70% of health spending. Only 5% of ordered labs are actually " high value," depending on clinical circumstances. Low-value tests, defined as not appropriate for a given clinical scenario, are ordered in one in five clinic visits. Up to $ 750 billion is spent on these low-value tests, contributing to the estimated one-quarter to one-third of healthcare spending is on wasteful services. We sought to quantify test-specific low-value ordering behaviors in urban outpatient clinics across three standardized patient cases.
Method(s): Unannounced standardized patients (USPs-highly trained actors portraying patients with standardized case presentations) were introduced into medicine residents' primary care clinics in a large urban, safety net hospital over the past five years. The USPs simulated three common outpatient clinical scenarios: a " Well" visit, a visit with a chief complaint of " Fatigue," and a visit with a diagnosis of " Asthma." Diagnostic orders were extracted via retrospective chart review for these standardized visits. For each scenario, appropriateness of diagnostic testing was determined by reference to United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) and relevant specialty society clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). " Wasteful" (over-ordered) tests were defined as those not explicitly indicated for the given scenario. Costs were derived from GoodRx.com according to local ZIP codes.
Result(s): The most commonly wasteful tests for the Asthma case were CBC (8% of 170 visits) and Chem-7 (6%), though the relative risk of over-ordering TSH was 3.8x that of other scenarios. The most commonly over-ordered tests for the Fatigue case were LFTs (14% of 148 visits) and HBV (5%), with LFTs ordered up to 15-fold more frequently than in other scenarios. The most commonly over-ordered tests for the Well case were BMP (35% of 124 visits), CBC (15%), LFTs (15%), and HBV (11%) ordered at rates up to 6.3x, 2.0x, 14.2x, and 7.4x higher than other scenarios. Finally, the average per patient excess costs were $ 8.27 (+/-$ 1.76), $ 6.79 (+/-$ 4.5), and $ 23.5 (+/-$ 9.34) for Asthma, Fatigue, and Well cases respectively.
Conclusion(s): Inappropriateness in test ordering patterns were observed through USP simulated cases. Certain tests (CBC, BMP, LFTs, and HBV) were more likely used wastefully across cases. Between cases, specific tests were ordered in an inappropriate manner (such as TSH for Asthma, LFTs for Fatigue, and BMP for Well visits). The per patient direct cost of low value testing rose above $ 20 per visit for the Well visit, though the Fatigue case exhibited the most variation. Notably, this excludes downstream (indirect) costs inestimatable from standardized encounters alone. Knowledge of wasteful utilization patterns associated with specific clinical scenarios can guide interventions targeting appropriate use of testing

Background: For quality care, physicians must be skilled in diagnosing and treating chronic pain. Some studies have shown gender differences in how providers manage pain. And more broadly, female providers provide more patient-centered communication which in turn has been linked to patient activation and satisfaction with care. We explore, using Unannounced Standardized Patients (USPs), whether resident physician gender is associated with the core underlying skills needed to effectively diagnose and management chronic pain: communication, patient centeredness, and patient activation.
Method(s): We designed two USP cases and sent these undercover patients into primary care clinics at two urban, safety-net clinics. The USP cases were similar: a 30-35 y.o. male, presented as a new patient to the clinic with either shoulder pain induced by heavy lifting or knee pain due to a recreational sports injury. USPs completed a post-visit checklist that assessed patient satisfaction (4 items), patient activation (3 items), and communication skills (13 items) using a behaviorally-anchored scale (not done or partly done vs. well done). Summary scores were calculated for each of the three domains. Residents provided consent for their educational data to be used for research as part of an IRB-approved medical education registry.
Result(s): A total of 135 USP visits (80 female providers, 55 male) occurred between 2012 and 2018. Female providers saw 41 shoulder pain and 39 knee pain cases while male providers saw 21 shoulder and 34 knee cases. ANOVA was used to assess differences in summary scores by provider gender (male vs female) and by case portrayed (knee vs shoulder). Skills did not differ significantly by whether knee or shoulder pain case. Gender effects were not seen for patient centeredness or for patient activation; however female providers performed significantly better at relationship development (83% vs males 72% shoulder pain; 70% vs 66% knee pain case; p<.001) and information gathering (86% vs. males 72% shoulder pain; 79% vs66% in knee case; p<.016). Male providers, however, performed slightly better in patient education and counseling (65% vs 63% for shoulder and 38% vs 33% for knee cases; p<.001).
Conclusion(s): Developing a relationship and gathering information are critical to pain management and female residents performed better than male residents in these areas. Male providers performed slightly better than women in patient education and provider gender was not associated with any differences in patient centeredness or activation. In the future, we plan to link these underlying skills to pain management decisions, documentation and ultimately to patient outcomes. We suspect that patient activation may best be measured at follow-up, something not possible with our current USP methodology. Gender differences could be viewed as striking in the context of our relatively homogeneous sample (medicine residency program) and shared clinical environment/healthcare system

Background: There is an increased awareness among healthcare professionals to discuss social determinant of health (SDOH) information with patients. However, the awareness does not necessarily translate into effective response to the situation. In order to better understand the nuances in such conversations between patients and providers, we reviewed qualitative responses from Unannounced Standardized Patient (USP) portraying patients with SDOH concerns who were seen as part of a study to investigate healthcare teams' management of SDOH information.
Method(s): USPs, representing six different clinical cases, were seen by residents at an urban safety-net hospital. Each case had SDOH issues (financial and housing insecurity, social isolation), and USPs were trained to provide such information in a systematic fashion in response to provider questioning. After the encounter, USPs completed a behaviorally-anchored, standardized checklist, and also entered their impressions of the encounter in free text. The focus of this study was to evaluate these comments using a qualitative approach, focusing only on those that addressed SDOH. 258 visits occurred from 2017-present, and 209 relevant comments were analyzed.
Result(s): Three general themes emerged: residents' openness to discussion of SDOH, their understanding of how these issues related to presenting concerns, and how they responded to those concerns. Some providers did not explore SDOH prompts, e.g. " I don't think she cut me off, but she quickly moved on to her next question without further delving deeper", while others were more responsive and supportive e.g., the provider " is very open to hearing my situation, I was able to fully explain my situation clearly." Such provider behavior impacted trust and connection, e.g., " Doctor X had good communication skills, but I felt like he didn't really hear my full story" There were variations in how well providers related SDOH to medical symptoms, e.g. " he completely ignored my concerns about mold at home" [asthma case] vs. " His questions centered around possible anxiety this (housing issue) might be causing me." After acknowledgement, fewer providers provided specific information or referrals to address the problem. This lack of follow-up seemed to leave USPs feeling uncomfortable. Both empathic comments and suggestions for actions influenced their sense of activation to manage their health post-visit.
Conclusion(s): Data from the USP visits indicate that there is a range of attention to and follow up on patient presentation of SDOH needs by trainees in clinical settings. Issues of both general communication skills, awareness of connection between SDOH and health, and awareness of local resources impacted provider behavior, which then had an effect on relationship with patients. The complex issues involved in addressing SDOH highlights the diverse training needs for learners

Needs and Objectives: There is an increasing need for resident education on substance use disorders (SUDs). The purpose of our curriculum was to improve residents' knowledge, skills, and attitudes on treating patients with SUDs. Setting and Participants: First and second year residents from NYU's Primary Care, Internal Medicine program participated in the Block of Addiction Medicine (BAM!) curriculum. Clinical settings included buprenorphine/methadone clinics and outpatient treatment programs in a large, urban safety net hospital system. Description: BAMis an intensive two week curriculum focused on SUDs. To improve residents' knowledge, we included didactic sessions on substances, including alcohol, opiates, and tobacco. Sessions covered epidemiology, biology, and treatment, including pharmacologic options, with all residents receiving buprenorphine prescribing waiver training. BAMwas delivered by an interdisciplinary faculty that included addiction medicine specialists, department of health officials, and general practitioners, nurses, and social workers who have worked extensively with patients with SUDs. Workshops built skills including screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) and motivational interviewing. Residents attended buprenorphine/methadone clinics, outpatient treatment programs, and 12-step (AA/NA) meetings. Residents shared lunch in a non-clinical setting with patients in recovery to understand their perspectives on living with addiction. Evaluation: Residents' attitudes and self-perceived efficacy in treating SUDs were surveyed. Pre and post data was obtained on 15 of 16 participants. Using the medical condition regard scale (MCRS), an 11 item questionnaire on biases/emotions/expectations for treating patients with SUD, we found a statistically significant improvement in the composite score, from 44.46 to 47.0 (p=0.026). Of 15 residents, 11 reported improved ability to effectively screen for SUD, 10 reported improved comfort in screening patients for SUD, 12 reported improved knowledge in using medically assisted treatment (MAT), and 14 reported improved ability to effectively treat patients with MAT (all p<.001 in Wilcoxon signed rank test). Qualitative feedback showed residents felt this curriculum was an essential part of their education; one participant commented: "this is a course that should be offered to every medical care provider." Discussion/Reflection/Lessons Learned: BAMincluded a varied curriculum delivered by inter-professional faculty. Residents reported improved comfort in treating patients with SUDs and demonstrated a significant improvement on the MCRS in their already positive attitudes towards treating this patient population. Qualitative feedback indicated that residents enjoyed BAMand found it important to their training. Given the increasing need for providers who are able to effectively treat SUDs, courses such as BAMare an effective and essential part of residency. Further studies are needed to assess if the changes in residents' attitudes persist and whether we influenced practice

BACKGROUND:Few programs train residents in recognizing and responding to distressed colleagues at risk for suicide. AIM/OBJECTIVE:To assess interns' ability to identify a struggling colleague, describe resources, and recognize that physicians can and should help colleagues in trouble. SETTING/METHODS:Residency programs at an academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:One hundred forty-five interns. PROGRAM DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:An OSCE case was designed to give interns practice and feedback on their skills in recognizing a colleague in distress and recommending the appropriate course of action. Embedded in a patient "sign-out" case, standardized health professionals (SHP) portrayed a resident with depressed mood and an underlying drinking problem. The SHP assessed intern skills in assessing symptoms and directing the resident to seek help. PROGRAM EVALUATION/RESULTS:Interns appreciated the opportunity to practice addressing this situation. Debriefing the case led to productive conversations between faculty and residents on available resources. Interns' skills require further development: while 60% of interns asked about their colleague's emotional state, only one-third screened for depression and just under half explored suicidal ideation. Only 32% directed the colleague to specific resources for his depression (higher among those that checked his emotional state, 54%, or screened for depression, 80%). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This OSCE case identified varying intern skill levels for identifying and assessing a struggling colleague while also providing experiential learning and supporting a culture of addressing peer wellness.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:In response to the opioid epidemic and efforts to expand substance use education in medical school, the authors introduced opioid overdose prevention training (OOPT) with naloxone for all first-year medical students (MS1s) as an adjunct to required basic life support training (BLST). The authors previously demonstrated improved knowledge and preparedness following in-person OOPT with BLST; however, it remains unclear whether online-administered OOPT would produce comparable results. In this study, the authors perform a retrospective comparison of online-administered OOPT with in-person-administered OOPT. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To compare the educational outcomes: knowledge, preparedness, and attitudes, for online versus in-person OOPT. METHODS:In-person OOPT was administered in 2014 and 2015 during BLST, whereas online OOPT was administered in 2016 during BLST pre-work. MS1s completed pre- and post-training tests covering 3 measures: knowledge (11-point scale), attitudes (66-point scale), and preparedness (60-point scale) to respond to an opioid overdose. Online scores from 2016 and in-person scores from 2015 were compared across all 3 measures using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) methods. RESULTS:After controlling for pre-test scores, there were statistical, but no meaningful, differences across all measures for in-person- and online-administered training. The estimated differences were knowledge: -0.05 (0.5%) points (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.47, 0.36); attitudes: 0.65 (1.0%) points (95% CI: -0.22, 1.51); and preparedness: 2.16 (3.6%) points (95% CI: 1.04, 3.28). CONCLUSIONS:The educational outcomes of online-administered OOPT compared with in-person-administered OOPT were not meaningfully different. These results support the use of online-administered OOPT. As our study was retrospective, based on data collected over multiple years, further investigation is needed in a randomized controlled setting, to better understand the educational differences of in-person and online training. Further expanding OOPT to populations beyond medical students would further improve generalizability.

OBJECTIVE:To provide evidence for the validity of an Introductory Clinical Experience (ICE) that was implemented as a baseline assessment of medical students' clinical communication skills to support progression of skills over time. METHODS:In this longitudinal study of communication skills, medical students completed the ICE, then a Practice of Medicine (POM) Objective Structured Clinical Exam 8 months later, and the Comprehensive Clinical Skills Exam (CCSE) 25 months later. At each experience, trained Standardized Patients assessed students, using the same behaviorally anchored checklist in 3 domains: Information Gathering, Relationship Development, and Patient Education and Counseling (PEC) with good internal reliability (.70-.87). Skills development patterns were described. ICE as a predictor of later performance was explored. Students' perspectives were elicited. RESULTS: = .48, large effect), in 4 patterns. ICE and POM scores predicted future communication skills. Most students recognized the educational value of ICE. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Entering medical students' clinical communication skills increase over time on average and may predict future performance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Implementing an ICE is likely a valid strategy for monitoring progress and facilitating communication skills development.

Background: The growing opioid overdose epidemic has grappled the nation with the CDC now reporting that drug overdose deaths have become the most common cause of death for young people. Medical education has historically ignored substance use disorders, and though they generally require all medical students to learn basic life support, they have not taught how to respond to opioid overdoses. Further, medical education is moving towards modalities which utilize adult learning theory. One such modality are online modules. However, there are few studies comparing their outcomes with traditional lectures. Previously, the authors compared in-person and online training of medical students to respond to opioid overdoses using naloxone in a non-randomized controlled setting, which showed no meaningful differences in knowledge, attitudes, and preparedness outcomes for students. In this paper, the authors attempt to use a randomized controlled trial to compare the two educational modalities at a second urban medical school.
Objective(s): The author's primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of online compared to in-person training for knowledge. Our secondary objective were to show non-inferiority of online compared to in-person training attitudes, and preparedness.
Method(s): Our study received IRB exemption as an education intervention. As a part of a transition to clinical clerkships curriculum used for second year medical students, second year medical students in an urban medical school were randomized into training sessions by the office of medical education without foreknowledge of the planned study. Students taking the online training were provided with a link to online modules with pre- and post-tests and video based lectures. Students randomized to the in-person training group took a pre-test just prior to receiving an oral lecture, and then immediately completed a post-test. Paired student's t-tests were used to compare measurements for each group in knowledge, attitudes, and preparedness, and Cohen's D was used to measure the effect size of the change. We calculated 99% confidence intervals for each measure and utilized a margin of non-inferiority of 5%.
Result(s): The in-person group demonstrated a statistically significant increase in knowledge, a non-statistically significant decrease in self-reported preparedness, and a small non-statistically significant increase in attitudes, see Table 1. The online group demonstrated a statistically significant increase in knowledge and self-reported preparedness, without a statistically significant change in attitudes, see Table 1. 99% CIs were [-0.20, 1.09] for knowledge, [6.51, 10.93] for preparedness, and [-2.32, 1.59] for attitudes, see Figure 1.
Conclusion(s): Online training for opioid overdose prevention training provided non-inferior outcomes for knowledge, preparedness, and attitudes. This study supports the use of online opioid overdose prevention training as a non-inferior alternative to in-person training

BACKGROUND:We developed and implemented the Substance Abuse Research Education and Training (SARET) program for medical, dental, nursing, and social work students to address the dearth of health professionals pursuing research and careers in substance use disorders (SUD). SARET has two main components: (1) A novel online curriculum addressing core SUD research topics, to reach a large number of students. (2) A mentored summer research experience for in-depth exposure. METHODS:Modules were integrated into the curricula of the lead institution, and of five external schools. We assessed the number of web modules completed and their effect on students' interest in SUD research. We also assessed the impact of the mentorship experience on participants' attitudes and early career trajectories, including current involvement in SUD research. RESULTS:Since 2008, over 24,000 modules have been completed by approximately 9,700 individuals. In addition to integration of the modules into curricula at the lead institution, all five health-professional partner schools integrated at least one module and approximately 5,500 modules were completed by individuals outside the lead institution. We found an increase in interest in SUD research after completion of the modules for students in all four disciplines. From 2008-2015, 76 students completed summer mentorships; 8 students completed year-long mentorships; 13 published in SUD-related journals, 18 presented at national conferences, and 3 are actively engaged in SUD-related research. Mentorship participants reported a positive influence on their attitudes towards SUD-related clinical care, research, and inter-professional collaboration, leading in some cases to changes in career plans. CONCLUSIONS:A modular curriculum that stimulates clinical and research interest in SUD can be successfully integrated, into medical, dental, nursing, and social work curricula. The SARET program of mentored research participation fostered early research successes and influenced career choice of some participants. Longer-term follow-up will enable us to assess more distal careers of the program.