Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

person:porteb02

in-biosketch:yes

Total Results:

41


Charting a Key Competency Domain: Understanding Resident Physician Interprofessional Collaboration (IPC) Skills

Zabar, Sondra; Adams, Jennifer; Kurland, Sienna; Shaker-Brown, Amara; Porter, Barbara; Horlick, Margaret; Hanley, Kathleen; Altshuler, Lisa; Kalet, Adina; Gillespie, Colleen
BACKGROUND: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is essential for quality care. Understanding residents' level of competence is a critical first step to designing targeted curricula and workplace learning activities. In this needs assessment, we measured residents' IPC competence using specifically designed Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) cases and surveyed residents regarding training needs. METHODS: We developed three cases to capture IPC competence in the context of physician-nurse collaboration. A trained actor played the role of the nurse (Standardized Nurse - SN). The Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) framework was used to create a ten-item behaviorally anchored IPC performance checklist (scored on a three-point scale: done, partially done, well done) measuring four generic domains: values/ethics; roles/responsibilities; interprofessional communication; and teamwork. Specific skills required for each scenario were also assessed, including teamwork communication (SBAR and CUS) and patient-care-focused tasks. In addition to evaluating IPC skills, the SN assessed communication, history-taking and physical exam skills. IPC scores were computed as percent of items rated well done in each domain (Cronbach's alpha > 0.77). Analyses include item frequencies, comparison of mean domain scores, correlation between IPC and other skills, and content analysis of SN comments and resident training needs. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight residents (of 199 total) completed an IPC case and results are reported for the 162 who participated in our medical education research registry. IPC domain scores were: Roles/responsibilities mean = 37 % well done (SD 37 %); Values/ethics mean = 49 % (SD 40 %); Interprofessional communication mean = 27 % (SD 36 %); Teamwork mean = 47 % (SD 29 %). IPC was not significantly correlated with other core clinical skills. SNs' comments focused on respect and IPC as a distinct skill set. Residents described needs for greater clarification of roles and more workplace-based opportunities structured to support interprofessional education/learning. CONCLUSIONS: The IPC cases and competence checklist are a practical method for conducting needs assessments and evaluating IPC training/curriculum that provides rich and actionable data at both the individual and program levels.
PMCID:4945565
PMID: 27121308
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 2092562

Coaching in GME: Lessons Learned From 3 Unique Coaching Programs

Scheer, Magdalena; Scott, Kevin R; Schoppen, Zachary; Porter, Barbara; Caretta-Weyer, Holly A; Hammoud, Maya M; Winkel, Abigail Ford
PMCID:12080498
PMID: 40386485
ISSN: 1949-8357
CID: 5852782

Evaluating the Impact of Coaching Through the Transition to Residency

Winkel, Abigail Ford; Porter, Barbara; Scheer, Magdalena Robak; Triola, Marc; Pecoriello, Jillian; Cheloff, Abraham Zachary; Gillespie, Colleen
BACKGROUND:Coaching has been proposed to support the transition to residency. Clarifying its impact will help define its value and best use. OBJECTIVE:To explore the experiences of residents working with coaches through the residency transition. DESIGN/METHODS:A cohort comparison survey compared experiences of a coached resident cohort with coaches to the prior, uncoached cohort. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Post-graduate year (PGY)-2 residents in internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and pathology at a single academic center. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Faculty trained as coaches had semi-structured meetings with graduating medical students and residents throughout the PGY-1 year. MAIN MEASURES/METHODS:An online anonymous survey assessed effects of coaching on measures of self-directed learning, professional development, program support and impact of coaching using existing scales (2-item Maslach Burnout Inventory, Brief Resilient Coping Scale, 2-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Stanford Professional Fulfillment Inventory), and novel measures adapted for this survey. Bivariate analyses (t-tests and chi-square tests) compared cohort responses. MANOVA assessed the effects of coaching, burnout and their interactions on the survey domains. KEY RESULTS/RESULTS:Of 156 PGY2 residents, 86 (55%) completed the survey. More residents in the "un-coached" cohort reported burnout (69%) than the "coached" cohort (51%). Burnout was significantly and negatively associated (F = 3.97 (df 7, 75); p < .001) with the learning and professional development outcomes, while being coached was significantly and positively associated with those outcomes (F = 5.54 (df 9, 75); p < .001). Significant interaction effects were found for goal-setting attitudes, professional fulfillment, and perceived program career support such that the positive differences in these outcomes between coached and un-coached residents were greater among burned out residents. Coached residents reported a positive impact of coaching across many domains. CONCLUSIONS:Residents experiencing coaching reported better professional fulfillment and development outcomes, with more pronounced differences in trainees experiencing burnout. Coaching is a promising tool to support a fraught professional transition.
PMID: 38926320
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 5733182

Requested a Different Doctor: Developing and Evaluating an OSCE Assessing Core Skills in Supporting Trainees Facing Patient Discrimination

Beltran, Christine P; Wilhite, Jeffrey A; Gonzalez, Cristina M; Porter, Barbara; Torres, Christian; Horlick, Margaret; Hauck, Kevin; Gillespie, Colleen; Zabar, Sondra; Greene, Richard E
BACKGROUND:Suboptimal support for colleagues experiencing discrimination can adversely impact clinician well-being and patient care. AIM/OBJECTIVE:To describe resident performance and experience during an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) case centered on supporting a trainee facing discrimination to inform enhanced, supportive learning environments. SETTING/METHODS:Formative, internal medicine OSCE at a simulation center. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:148 second-year residents across 2018, 2019, 2021, 2022. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION/METHODS:Residents had 10 min to support a Muslim standardized intern (SI) experiencing discrimination from a patient. The SI rated resident performance across Supervision, Relationship Development, and Support domains and provided written feedback. Post-OSCE evaluations elicited resident reflections on case challenges. PROGRAM EVALUATION/RESULTS:Proficient residents (≥ 80% average score across domains, n = 85) performed better in all items, except in not acting defensive and collaborating with SI to develop follow-up plan, compared to non-proficient residents (n = 65). The SI described effective approaches to feeling supported, including using empathetic statements, stating personal stance on discrimination, exhibiting supportive body language, and verbalizing support. Stating knowledge of situation upfront was an area of improvement. Residents found engaging the distressed SI difficult. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Use of an explicit discrimination OSCE case can help identify effective approaches to supporting targets of discriminatory patients to inform future training.
PMID: 39349704
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 5751402

Diversity and Inclusion Through Collaboration: Co-Producing a Simulation Curriculum to Address Discrimination Against Trainees

Torres, Christian; Morales, David; Whitley, Amber; Porter, Barbara; Greene, Richard; Zabar, Sondra
Discrimination toward trainees is a pervasive problem, with surveys showing it is often perpetrated by patients. For several years, residents and faculty in an internal medicine residency have participated in a workshop offering a framework for responding to discriminatory behavior by patients. As part of a larger effort to reinforce this teaching and promote an inclusive environment, the authors pursued a multi-pronged simulation curriculum that could be incorporated into graduate medical education programs across their institution. First, the authors conducted trainee and faculty focus groups to better understand their experiences. Qualitative data was collected, including recommendations for responding to discrimination, characteristics of the most common experiences, and trainees' own ideas for worthwhile simulation scenarios. Trainees and faculty were then brought together in a collaborative process to co-develop simulation cases that were later implemented in curricula across multiple learner levels, specialties, and contexts. Participants in these simulations reported improved comfort in responding to discrimination in the moment and/or in the wake of such incidents. Through trainee-faculty collaboration, the project yielded authentic and impactful simulation experiences for learners, while also giving trainees an opportunity to turn previous trauma into constructive learning opportunities that promote an inclusive environment.
PMID: 39265094
ISSN: 1938-808x
CID: 5690592

Addressing social determinants of health in primary care: a quasi-experimental study using unannounced standardised patients to evaluate the impact of audit/feedback on physicians' rates of identifying and responding to social needs

Gillespie, Colleen; Wilhite, Jeffrey A; Hanley, Kathleen; Hardowar, Khemraj; Altshuler, Lisa; Fisher, Harriet; Porter, Barbara; Wallach, Andrew; Zabar, Sondra
BACKGROUND:Although efforts are underway to address social determinants of health (SDOH), little is known about physicians' SDOH practices despite evidence that failing to fully elicit and respond to social needs can compromise patient safety and undermine both the quality and effectiveness of treatment. In particular, interventions designed to enhance response to social needs have not been assessed using actual practice behaviour. In this study, we evaluate the degree to which providing primary care physicians with feedback on their SDOH practice behaviours is associated with increased rates of eliciting and responding to housing and social isolation needs. METHODS:Unannounced standardised patients (USPs), actors trained to consistently portray clinical scenarios, were sent, incognito, to all five primary care teams in an urban, safety-net healthcare system. Scenarios involved common primary care conditions and each included an underlying housing (eg, mould in the apartment, crowding) and social isolation issue and USPs assessed whether the physician fully elicited these needs and if so, whether or not they addressed them. The intervention consisted of providing physicians with audit/feedback reports of their SDOH practices, along with brief written educational material. A prepost comparison group design was used to evaluate the intervention; four teams received the intervention and one team served as a 'proxy' comparison (no intervention). Preintervention (February 2017 to December 2017) rates of screening for and response to the scripted housing and social needs were compared with intervention period (January 2018 to March 2019) rates for both intervention and comparison teams. RESULTS:108 visits were completed preintervention and 183 during the intervention period. Overall, social needs were not elicited half of the time and fully addressed even less frequently. Rates of identifying the housing issue increased for teams that received audit/feedback reports (46%-60%; p=0.045) and declined for the proxy comparison (61%-42%; p=0.174). Rates of responding to housing needs increased significantly for intervention teams (15%-41%; p=0.004) but not for the comparison team (21%-29%; p=0.663). Social isolation was identified more frequently postintervention (53%) compared with baseline (39%; p=0.041) among the intervention teams but remained unchanged for the comparison team (39% vs 32%; p=0.601). Full exploration of social isolation remained low for both intervention and comparison teams. CONCLUSIONS:Results suggest that physicians may not be consistently screening for or responding to social needs but that receiving feedback on those practices, along with brief targeted education, can improve rates of SDOH screening and response.
PMID: 35623722
ISSN: 2044-5423
CID: 5284022

Comparison of Treatment Retention of Adults With Opioid Addiction Managed With Extended-Release Buprenorphine vs Daily Sublingual Buprenorphine-Naloxone at Time of Release From Jail

Lee, Joshua D; Malone, Mia; McDonald, Ryan; Cheng, Anna; Vasudevan, Kumar; Tofighi, Babak; Garment, Ann; Porter, Barbara; Goldfeld, Keith S; Matteo, Michael; Mangat, Jasdeep; Katyal, Monica; Giftos, Jonathan; MacDonald, Ross
Importance/UNASSIGNED:Extended-release buprenorphine (XRB), a monthly injectable long-acting opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment, has not been studied for use in corrections facilities. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To compare treatment retention following release from jail among adults receiving daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (SLB) vs those receiving XRB. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This open-label, randomized comparative effectiveness study included 52 incarcerated adults in New York City observed for 8 weeks postrelease between June 2019 and May 2020. Participants were soon-to-be-released volunteers from 1 men's and 1 women's jail facility who had OUDs already treated with SLB. Follow-up treatment was received at a primary care clinic in Manhattan. Data were analyzed between June 2020 and December 2020. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:XRB treatment was offered prior to release and continued monthly through 8 weeks after release. SLB participants continued to receive daily directly observed in-jail SLB administration, were provided a 7-day SLB supply at jail release, and followed up at a designated clinic (or other preferred clinics). Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Buprenorphine treatment retention at 8 weeks postrelease. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 52 participants were randomized 1:1 to XRB (26 participants) and SLB (26 participants). Participants had a mean (SD) age of 42.6 (10.0) years; 45 participants (87%) were men; and 40 (77%) primarily used heroin prior to incarceration. Most participants (30 [58%]) reported prior buprenorphine use; 18 (35%) reported active community buprenorphine treatment prior to jail admission. Twenty-one of 26 assigned to XRB received 1 or more XRB injection prior to release; 3 initiated XRB postrelease; and 2 did not receive XRB. Patients in the XRB arm had fewer jail medical visits compared with daily SLB medication administration (mean [SD] visits per day: XRB, 0.11 [0.03] vs SLB, 1.06 [0.08]). Community buprenorphine treatment retention at week 8 postrelease was 18 participants in the XRB group (69.2%) vs 9 in the SLB group (34.6%), and rates of opioid-negative urine tests were 72 of 130 tests in the XRB group (55.3%) and 50 of 130 tests in the SLB group (38.4%). There were no differences in rates of serious adverse events, no overdoses, and no deaths. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:XRB was acceptable among patients currently receiving SLB, and patients had fewer in-jail clinic visits and increased community buprenorphine treatment retention when compared with standard daily SLB treatment. These results support wider use and further study of XRB as correctional and reentry OUD treatment. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03604159.
PMCID:8427378
PMID: 34495340
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5011982

Supporting a learning healthcare system-using an ongoing unannounced standardized patient program to continuously improve primary care resident education, team training, and healthcare quality [Meeting Abstract]

Gillespie, C; Wilhite, J; Hardowar, K; Fisher, H; Hanley, K; Altshuler, L; Wallach, A; Porter, B; Zabar, S
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
EMBASE:635796917
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4984892

Clinical problem solving and social determinants of health: a descriptive study using unannounced standardized patients to directly observe how resident physicians respond to social determinants of health

Wilhite, Jeffrey A; Hardowar, Khemraj; Fisher, Harriet; Porter, Barbara; Wallach, Andrew B; Altshuler, Lisa; Hanley, Kathleen; Zabar, Sondra R; Gillespie, Colleen C
PMID: 33108337
ISSN: 2194-802x
CID: 4775402

Clinical problem solving and social determinants of health: a descriptive study using unannounced standardized patients to directly observe how resident physicians respond to social determinants of health

Wilhite, Jeffrey A; Hardowar, Khemraj; Fisher, Harriet; Porter, Barbara; Wallach, Andrew B; Altshuler, Lisa; Hanley, Kathleen; Zabar, Sondra R; Gillespie, Colleen C
Objectives While the need to address patients' social determinants of health (SDoH) is widely recognized, less is known about physicians' actual clinical problem-solving when it comes to SDoH. Do physicians include SDoH in their assessment strategy? Are SDoH incorporated into their diagnostic thinking and if so, do they document as part of their clinical reasoning? And do physicians directly address SDoH in their "solution" (treatment plan)? Methods We used Unannounced Standardized Patients (USPs) to assess internal medicine residents' clinical problem solving in response to a patient with asthma exacerbation and concern that her moldy apartment is contributing to symptoms - a case designed to represent a clear and direct link between a social determinant and patient health. Residents' clinical practices were assessed through a post-visit checklist and systematic chart review. Patterns of clinical problem solving were identified and then explored, in depth, through review of USP comments and history of present illness (HPI) and treatment plan documentation. Results Residents fell into three groups when it came to clinical problem-solving around a housing trigger for asthma: those who failed to ask about housing and therefore did not uncover mold as a potential trigger (neglectors - 21%; 14/68); those who asked about housing in negative ways that prevented disclosure and response (negative elicitors - 24%, 16/68); and those who elicited and explored the mold issue (full elicitors - 56%; 28/68). Of the full elicitors 53% took no further action, 26% only documented the mold; and 21% provided resources/referral. In-depth review of USP comments/explanations and residents' notes (HPI, treatment plan) revealed possible influences on clinical problem solving. Failure to ask about housing was associated with both contextual factors (rushed visit) and interpersonal skills (not fully engaging with patient) and with possible differences in attention ("known" vs. unknown/new triggers, usual symptoms vs. changes, not attending to relocation, etc.,). Use of close-ended questions often made it difficult for the patient to share mold concerns. Negative responses to sharing of housing information led to missing mold entirely or to the patient not realizing that the physician agreed with her concerns about mold. Residents who fully elicited the mold situation but did not take action seemed to either lack knowledge or feel that action on SDoH was outside their realm of responsibility. Those that took direct action to help the patient address mold appeared to be motivated by an enhanced sense of urgency. Conclusions Findings provide unique insight into residents' problem solving processes including external influences (e.g., time, distractions), the role of core communication and interpersonal skills (eliciting information, creating opportunities for patients to voice concerns, sharing clinical thinking with patients), how traditional cognitive biases operate in practice (premature closure, tunneling, and ascertainment bias), and the ways in which beliefs about expectancies and scope of practice may color clinical problem-solving strategies for addressing SDoH.
PMID: 32735551
ISSN: 2194-802x
CID: 4540752