Search

Background: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has long recognized and championed increasing diversity within the surgical workplace. SAGES initiated the Fundamentals of Leadership Development (FLD) Curriculum to address these needs and to provide surgeon leaders with the necessary tools and skills to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in surgical practice. In 2019, the American College of Surgeons issued a request for anti-racism initiatives which lead to the partnering of the two societies. The primary goal of FLD was to create the first surgeon-focused leadership curriculum dedicated to DEI. The rationale/development of this curriculum and its evaluation/feedback methods are detailed in this White Paper. Methods: The FLD curriculum was developed by a multidisciplinary task force that included surgeons, education experts, and diversity consultants. The curriculum development followed the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) instructional design model and utilized a problem-based learning approach. Competencies were identified, and specific learning objectives and assessments were developed. The implementation of the curriculum was designed to be completed in short intervals (virtual and in-person). Post-course surveys used the Kirkpatrick's model to evaluate the curriculum and provide valuable feedback. Results: The curriculum consisted of interactive online modules, an online discussion forum, and small group interactive sessions focused in three key areas: (1) increasing pipeline of underrepresented individuals in surgical leadership, (2) healthcare equity, and (3) conflict negotiation. By focusing on positive action items and utilizing a problem-solving approach, the curriculum aimed to provide a framework for surgical leaders to make meaningful changes in their institutions and organizations. Conclusion: The FLD curriculum is a novel leadership curriculum that provided surgeon leaders with the knowledge and tools to improve diversity in three areas: pipeline improvement, healthcare equity, and conflict negotiation. Future directions include using pilot course feedback to enhance curricular effectiveness and delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Sexual violence (SV) and adolescent relationship abuse (ARA) are common in the U. S. and have strong associations with negative health and wellbeing outcomes. Manhood 2.0 is the first U.S. program designed for community settings to build bystander skills while also challenging harmful gender norms. A cluster-randomized trial comparing Manhood 2.0 to Job Skills, a job readiness training control condition, demonstrated that it is a promising strategy to prevent sexual violence and adolescent relationship abuse. Such community-based interventions may be particularly relevant in lower resource urban settings, and the costs of such prevention programs have not been considered previously. Methods: The aim of the present study is to perform systematic and standardized cost calculations associated with implementing Manhood 2.0 among adolescent males. In addition, this study provides detailed cost information of the community-based intervention program, as well as costs associated with implementing the Job Skills control program. Program implementation data were recorded throughout the study period (2015–2019) by the Manhood 2.0 study team. Results: The cost of implementing Manhood 2.0 is $4,771 per complete round of program delivery and $451 per participant, which is approximately the same cost as the control Job Skills program ($4,432 and $453 per participant). The marginal cost per additional round of Manhood 2.0 program is $3,682. Conclusion: Implementation of a community-based program requires substantial resources and collaborations with community partners especially in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. This study provides a snapshot of the cost information of a community-based intervention program from the implementing agency's perspective, which is essential in helping decision-makers understand the costs they will incur by implementing prevention programs and ensuring program feasibility and sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]