Faculty Bibliography

Previous eras of assessment in medical education have been defined by how assessment is done, from knowledge exams popularized in the 1960s to the emergence of work-based assessment in the 1990s to current efforts to integrate multiple types and sources of performance data through programmatic assessment. Each of these eras was a response to why assessment was performed (e.g., assessing medical knowledge with exams; assessing communication, professionalism, and systems competencies with work-based assessment). Despite the evolution of assessment eras, current evidence highlights the graduation of trainees with foundational gaps in the ability to provide high-quality care to patients presenting with common problems, and training program leaders report they graduate trainees they would not trust to care for themselves or their loved ones. In this article, the authors argue that the next era of assessment should be defined by why assessment is done: to ensure high-quality, equitable care. Assessment should place focus on demanding graduates possess the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and adaptive expertise to meet the needs of all patients and ensuring that graduates are able to do this in an equitable fashion. The authors explore 2 patient-focused assessment approaches that could help realize the promise of this envisioned era: entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and resident sensitive quality measures (RSQMs)/TRainee Attributable and Automatable Care Evaluations in Real-time (TRACERs). These examples illustrate how the envisioned next era of assessment can leverage existing and new data to provide precision education assessment that focuses on providing formative and summative feedback to trainees in a manner that seeks to ensure their learning outcomes prepare them to ensure high-quality, equitable patient outcomes.

Precision education (PE) uses personalized educational interventions to empower trainees and improve learning outcomes. While PE has the potential to represent a paradigm shift in medical education, a theoretical foundation to guide the effective implementation of PE strategies has not yet been described. Here, the authors introduce a theoretical foundation for the implementation of PE, integrating key learning theories with the digital tools that allow them to be operationalized. Specifically, the authors describe how the master adaptive learner (MAL) model, transformative learning theory, and self-determination theory can be harnessed in conjunction with nudge strategies and audit and feedback dashboards to drive learning and meaningful behavior change. The authors also provide practical examples of these theories and tools in action by describing precision interventions already in use at one academic medical center, concretizing PE's potential in the current clinical environment. These examples illustrate how a firm theoretical grounding allows educators to most effectively tailor PE interventions to fit individual learners' needs and goals, facilitating efficient learning and, ultimately, improving patient and health system outcomes.

BACKGROUND:While recognized as a key HIV prevention strategy, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) availability and accessibility are not well documented globally. We aimed to describe PrEP drug registration status and the availability of PrEP services across HIV care sites participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium. METHODS:We used country-level PrEP drug registration status from the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and data from IeDEA surveys conducted in 2014, 2017 and 2020 among participating HIV clinics in seven global regions. We used descriptive statistics to assess PrEP availability across IeDEA sites serving adult patients in 2020 and examined trends in PrEP availability among sites that responded to all three surveys. RESULTS:Of 199 sites that completed the 2020 survey, PrEP was available in 161 (81%). PrEP availability was highest at sites in North America (29/30; 97%) and East Africa (70/74; 95%) and lowest at sites in Central (10/20; 50%) and West Africa (1/6; 17%). PrEP availability was higher among sites in countries where PrEP was officially registered (146/161; 91%) than where it was not (14/32; 44%). Availability was higher at health centers (109/120; 90%) and district hospitals (14/16; 88%) compared to regional/teaching hospitals (36/63). Among the 94 sites that responded to all three surveys, PrEP availability increased from 47% in 2014 to 60% in 2017 and 76% in 2020. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:PrEP availability has substantially increased since 2014 and is now available at most IeDEA sites. However, PrEP service provision varies markedly across global regions.

OBJECTIVES:This study examined COVID-19's impact in the 2020 compared to 2019 survey years on preventive medical care utilization. RESEARCH DESIGN:Using a cross-sectional sample of adults aged 18 years and over (2019; n = 31,997; 2020; n = 31,568), from the National Health Interview Survey, multivariable models compared 2020 to 2019 survey years for receiving diabetes screening blood tests, well-care visits, and physical therapy. An additional multivariable model predicted not having medical care due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 2020 survey year. RESULTS:In the 2020 versus 2019 survey years, the likelihood lowered for receiving a blood test for diabetes screening (aOR .83 CI = .76, .90). There was a lowered likelihood for a well care visits (aOR = .98 CI = .84, 1.1) and physical therapy (aOR = .97 CI = .89, 1.0). Black (aOR = .62 CI = .51, .75), Hispanic (aOR = .62 CI = .51, .75) and Asian (aOR .67 CI = .53, .86) adults had a lowered likelihood of having physical therapy compared to White adults. Having no insurance coverage lowered the likelihood of getting all three indicators of preventive medical care. There was a higher likelihood of not getting medical care due to COVID-19 in the 2020 survey year (aOR = 1.7 CI = 1.3, 2.1) with Medicaid compared to private coverage. CONCLUSIONS:Use of preventive medical care lowered in the pandemic. Race and ethnicity and not having any coverage contributed to not receiving preventive care. Medicaid appeared to increase utilization of preventive medical care but not acute medical care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:As the COVID-19 pandemic brought surges of hospitalized patients, it was important to focus on reducing overuse of tests and procedures to not only reduce potential harm to patients but also reduce unnecessary exposure to staff. The objective of this study was to create a Choosing Wisely in COVID-19 list to guide clinicians in practicing high-value care at our health system. METHODS:A Choosing Wisely in COVID-19 list was developed in October 2020 by an interdisciplinary High Value Care Council at New York City Health + Hospitals, the largest public health system in the United States. The first phase involved gathering areas of overuse from interdisciplinary staff across the system. The second phase used a modified Delphi scoring process asking participants to rate recommendations on a 5-point Likert scale based on criteria of degree of evidence, potential to prevent patient harm, and potential to prevent staff harm. RESULTS:The top 5 recommendations included avoiding tracheal intubation without trial of noninvasive ventilation (4.4); not placing routine central venous catheters (4.33); avoiding routine daily laboratory tests and batching laboratory draws (4.19); not ordering daily chest radiographs (4.17); and not using bronchodilators in the absence of reactive airway disease (4.13). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We successfully developed Choosing Wisely in COVID-19 recommendations that focus on evidence and preventing patient and staff harm in a large safety net system to reduce overuse.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:There are scant data on implementation of large-scale direct-acting antiviral treatment for hepatitis C virus in jails in the U.S. New York City Health + Hospitals/Correctional Health Services aimed to scale up hepatitis C virus treatment in the New York City jail system. This study describes the trends in annual hepatitis C virus treatment in New York City jails compared with those in Medicaid-funded treatment in the New York City community from 2014 to 2020. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:In this observational study, we extracted annual counts of direct-acting antiviral prescriptions for hepatitis C virus for those (1) in the New York City community who were covered by Medicaid and (2) those detained in New York City jails for 2014-2020. Data sources were New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene annual reports and Correctional Health Services treatment records, respectively. We used linear regression analysis to test for significant trends in annual treatment in these 2 cohorts during 2015-2019. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:<0.001). In 2019, New York City jail-based treatment initiations totaled the equivalent of 10% of treatment covered by Medicaid in New York City, up from 0.3% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Scale up of jail-based hepatitis C virus treatment is an important strategy to offset declines observed in the community. Addressing barriers to care in jail, such as improving testing, linkage to care, and affordability of direct-acting antivirals for jail-based health services, can help sustain high levels of treatment in U.S. jails and other carceral facilities.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The incidence of arrhythmia varies by time of day. How this affects individuals on maintenance dialysis is uncertain. Our objective was to quantify the relationship of arrhythmia with the time of day and timing of dialysis. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Secondary analysis of the Monitoring in Dialysis study, a multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Loop recorders were implanted for continuous cardiac monitoring in 66 participants on maintenance dialysis with a follow up of 6 months. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:Time of day based on 6-hour intervals. OUTCOMES/UNASSIGNED:Event rates of clinically significant arrhythmia. ANALYTICAL APPROACH/UNASSIGNED:Negative binomial mixed effects regression models for repeated measures were used to evaluate data from the Monitoring in Dialysis study for differences in diurnal patterns of clinically significant arrhythmia among those with end-stage kidney disease with heart failure and end-stage kidney disease alone. We additionally analyzed rates according to presence of heart failure, time of dialysis shift, and dialysis versus nondialysis day. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.43), their periodicity differed with a peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM in those with AM dialysis and a later peak between 6:00 AM and 11:59 AM in those with PM shifts. LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:Post hoc analysis, unable to account for unmeasured confounders. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Clinically significant arrhythmias showed strong diurnal patterns with a maximal peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM and noon. Although overall arrhythmia rates were similar, the peak rate occurred overnight in individuals without heart failure and during the morning in individuals with heart failure. Further exploration of the influence of circadian rhythm on arrhythmia in the setting of hemodialysis is needed.