Search

Introduction: Emergency medicine (EM) residency programs have variable approaches to educating residents on recognizing and managing healthcare disparities. We hypothesized that our curriculum with resident-presented lectures would increase residents' sense of cultural humility and ability to identify vulnerable populations., Methods: At a single-site, four-year EM residency program with 16 residents per year, we designed a curriculum intervention from 2019-2021 where all second-year residents selected one healthcare disparity topic and gave a 15-minute presentation overviewing the disparity, describing local resources, and facilitating a group discussion. We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the impact of the curriculum by electronically surveying all current residents before and after the curriculum intervention. We measured attitudes on cultural humility and ability to identify healthcare disparities among a variety of patient characteristics (race, gender, weight, insurance, sexual orientation, language, ability, etc). Statistical comparisons of mean responses were calculated using the Mann-Whitney U test for ordinal data., Results: A total of 32 residents gave presentations that covered a broad range of vulnerable patient populations including those that identify as Black, migrant farm workers, transgender, and deaf. The overall survey response was 38/64 (59.4%) pre-intervention and 43/64 (67.2%) post-intervention. Improvements were seen in resident self-reported cultural humility as measured by their responsibility to learn (mean responses of 4.73 vs 4.17; P < 0.001) and responsibility to be aware of different cultures (mean responses of 4.89 vs 4.42; P < 0.001). Residents reported an increased awareness that patients are treated differently in the healthcare system based on their race (P < 0.001) and gender (P < 0.001). All other domains queried, although not statistically significant, demonstrated a similar trend., Conclusion: This study demonstrates increased resident willingness to engage in cultural humility and the feasibility of resident near-peer teaching on a breadth of vulnerable patient populations seen in their clinical environment. Future studies may query the impact this curriculum has on resident clinical decision-making.

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents unique challenges to frontline healthcare workers. In order to safely care for patients new processes, such as a plan for the airway management of a patient with COVID-19, must be implemented and disseminated in a rapid fashion. The use of in-situ simulation has been used to assist in latent problem identification as part of a Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Additionally, simulation is an effective means for training teams to perform high-risk procedures before engaging in the actual procedure. This educational advance seeks to use and study in-situ simulation as a means to rapidly implement a process for airway management in patients with COVID-19.Methods: Using an airway algorithm developed by the authors, we designed an in-situ simulation scenario to train physicians, nurses, and respiratory therapists in best practices for airway management of patients with COVID-19. Physician participants were surveyed using a five-point Likert scale with regard to their comfort level with various aspects of the airway algorithm both before and after the simulation in a retrospective fashion. Additionally, we obtained feedback from all participants and used it to refine the airway algorithm.Results: Over a two-week period, 93 physicians participated in the simulation. We received 81 responses to the survey (87%), which showed that the average level of comfort with personal protective equipment procedures increased significantly from 2.94 (95% confidence interval, 2.71-3.17) to 4.36 (4.24-4.48), a difference of 1.42 (1.20-1.63, p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in average comfort level in understanding the physician role with scores increasing from 3.51 (3.26-3.77) to 4.55 (2.71-3.17), a difference of 1.04 (0.82-1.25, p < 0.001). There was also increased comfort in performing procedural tasks such as intubation, from 3.08 (2.80-3.35) to 4.38 (4.23-4.52) after the simulation, a difference of 1.30 points (1.06-1.54, p < 0.001). Feedback from the participants also led to refinement of the airway algorithm.Conclusion: We successfully implemented a new airway management guideline for patients with suspected COVID-19. In-situ simulation is an essential tool for both dissemination and onboarding, as well as process improvement, in the context of an epidemic or pandemic.