Search

Background Best practices to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the biomedical workforce remain poorly understood. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education launched the Barbara Ross-Lee, DO, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion award for sponsoring institutions to celebrate efforts to improve DEI in graduate medical education (GME). Objective To identify themes in practices used by award applicants to improve DEI efforts at their institutions, using a qualitative design. Methods This qualitative study employed an exploratory, inductive approach and constant comparative method to analyze award applications from 2 submission cycles (2020, 2021). Data analysis involved the use of a preliminary codebook of 29 program applications used in a previous study, which was modified and expanded, to perform a subsequent analysis of 12 sponsoring institution applications. Seven adjudication sessions were conducted to ensure coding consistency and resolve disagreements, resulting in the identification of final themes. Results Institutions approaches to advancing DEI resulted from work within 5 themes and 10 subthemes. The themes encompassed organizational commitment (policies that reflect DEI mission), data infrastructure (tracking recruitment, retention, and inclusion efforts), community connection (service-learning opportunities), diverse team engagement (coproduction with residents), and systematic strategies for DEI support throughout the educational continuum. Consistent across themes was the importance of collaboration, avoiding silos, and the need for a comprehensive longitudinal approach to DEI to achieve a diverse GME workforce. Conclusions This qualitative study identified 5 themes that can inform and guide sponsoring institutions in promoting DEI.

BACKGROUND: Increasing medical school faculty diversity is an urgent priority. National Institutes of Health (NIH) diversity supplements, which provide funding and career development opportunities to individuals underrepresented in research, are an important mechanism to increase faculty diversity. OBJECTIVE: Analyze diversity supplement utilization by medical schools. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: All R01 grant-associated diversity supplements awarded to medical schools from 2005 to 2020. Diversity supplements were identified using the publicly available NIH RePORTER database. MAIN MEASURES: Main measures were the number of R01-associated diversity supplements awarded to medical schools each year by medical school NIH funding status and the number of R01-associated diversity supplements awarded to individual medical schools in the NIH top 40 by funding status. We also examined the percentage of R01 grants with an associated diversity supplement by NIH funding status and individual medical school in the NIH top 40. KEY RESULTS: From 2005 to 2020, US medical school faculty received 1389 R01-associated diversity supplements. The number of diversity supplements awarded grew from 2012 to 2020, from ten to 187 for top 40 schools, and from seven to 83 for non-top 40 schools. The annual growth rate for diversity supplement awards at NIH top 40 schools (44.2%) was not significantly different than the annual growth rate among non-top 40 schools (36.2%; p = 0.68). From 2005 to 2020, the highest number of diversity supplements that an individual medical school received was 56 and the lowest number was four (mean = 24.6, SD = 11.7). The highest percentage of R01 grants with an associated diversity supplement received by a school was 4.5% and the lowest percentage was 0.79% (mean = 2.3%, SD = 0.98). CONCLUSION: Medical schools may be missing an opportunity to address the continuing shortage of individuals historically underrepresented in biomedical science and should consider additional mechanisms to enhance diversity supplement utilization.

Introduction: Medicine is increasingly influenced by politics, but physicians have historically had lower voter turnout than the general public. Turnout is even lower for younger voters. Little is known about the political interests, voting activity, or political action committee (PAC) involvement of emergency physicians in training. We evaluated EM trainees’ political priorities, use of and barriers to voting, and engagement with an emergency medicine (EM) PAC. Methods: Resident/medical student Emergency Medicine Residents’ Association members were emailed a survey between October–November 2018. Questions involved political priorities, perspective on single-payer healthcare, voting knowledge/behavior, and EM PACs participation. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics.  Results: Survey participants included 1,241 fully responding medical students and residents, with a calculated response rate of 20%. The top three healthcare priorities were as follows: 1) high cost of healthcare/price transparency; 2) decreasing the number of uninsured; and 3) quality of health insurance. The top EM-specific issue was ED crowding and boarding. Most trainees (70%) were supportive of single-payer healthcare: “somewhat favor” (36%) and “strongly favor” (34%). Trainees had high rates of voting in presidential elections (89%) but less frequent use of other voting options: 54% absentee ballots; 56% voting in state primary races; and 38% early voting. Over half (66%) missed voting in prior elections, with work cited as the most frequent (70%) barrier. While overall, half of respondents (62%) reported awareness of EM PACs, only 4% of respondents had contributed.  Conclusion: The high cost of healthcare was the top concern among EM trainees. Survey respondents had a high level of knowledge of absentee and early voting but less frequently used these options. Encouragement of early and absentee voting can improve voter turnout of EM trainees. Concerning EM PACs, there is significant room for membership growth. With improved knowledge of the political priorities of EM trainees, physician organizations and PACs can better engage future physicians.

Introduction: Urine drug screens (UDS) have unproven clinical utility in emergency department (ED) chest pain presentations. A test with such limited clinical utility may exponentiate biases in care, but little is known about the epidemiology of UDS use for this indication. We hypothesized that UDS utilization varies nationally across race and gender.Methods: This was a retrospective observational analysis of adult ED visits for chest pain in the 2011–2019 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. We calculated the utilization of UDS across race/ethnicity and gender and then characterized predictors of use via adjusted logistic regression models.Results: We analyzed 13,567 adult chest pain visits, representative of 85.8 million visits nationally. Use of UDS occurred for 4.6% of visits (95% CI 3.9%-5.4%). White females underwent UDS at 3.3% of visits (95% CI 2.5%-4.2%), and Black females at 4.1% (95% CI 2.9%-5.2%). White males were tested at 5.8% of visits (95% CI 4.4%-7.2%), while Black males were tested at 9.3% of visits (95% CI 6.4%-12.2%). A multivariate logistic regression model including race, gender, and time period shows significantly increased odds of ordering UDS for Black patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.45 (95% CI 1.11-1.90, p = 0.007)) and male patients (OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.55-2.58, p < 0.001) as compared to White patients and female patients.Conclusion: We identified wide disparities in the utilization of UDS for the evaluation of chest pain. If UDS were used at the rate observed for White women, Black men would undergo nearly 50,000 fewer tests annually. Future research should weigh the potential of the UDS to magnify biases in care against the unproven clinical utility of the test.

BackgroundSepsis affects 1.7 million patients in the US annually, is one of the leading causes of mortality, and is a major driver of US healthcare costs. African American/Black and LatinX populations experience higher rates of sepsis complications, deviations from standard care, and readmissions compared with Non-Hispanic White populations. Despite clear evidence of structural racism in sepsis care and outcomes, there are no prospective interventions to mitigate structural racism in sepsis care, nor are we aware of studies that report reductions in racial inequities in sepsis care as an outcome. Therefore, we will deliver and evaluate a coalition-based intervention to equip health systems and their surrounding communities to mitigate structural racism, driving measurable reductions in inequities in sepsis outcomes. This paper presents the theoretical foundation for the study, summarizes key elements of the intervention, and describes the methodology to evaluate the intervention.MethodsOur aims are to: (1) deliver a coalition-based leadership intervention in eight U.S. health systems and their surrounding communities; (2) evaluate the impact of the intervention on organizational culture using a longitudinal, convergent mixed methods approach, and (3) evaluate the impact of the intervention on reduction of racial inequities in three clinical outcomes: a) early identification (time to antibiotic), b) clinical management (in-hospital sepsis mortality) and c) standards-based follow up (same-hospital, all-cause sepsis readmissions) using interrupted time series analysis.DiscussionThis study is aligned with calls to action by the NIH and the Sepsis Alliance to address inequities in sepsis care and outcomes. It is the first to intervene to mitigate effects of structural racism by developing the domains of organizational culture that are required for anti-racist action, with implications for inequities in complex health outcomes beyond sepsis.

PurposeTo describe how racial microaggressions may affect optimal learning for under-represented health professions students.MethodThe authors conducted focus groups and individual interviews from November 2017 to June 2018 with 37 students at University of California, Davis and Yale University who self-identified as underrepresented in medicine or nursing. Questions explored incidence, response to, and effects of racial microaggressions, as well as students' suggestions for change. Data were organized and coded, then thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes.ResultsThe data showed consistent examples of microaggressions across both health professions and schools, with peers, faculty, preceptors, and structural elements of the curricula all contributing to microaggressive behavior. The 3 major themes were: students felt devalued by microaggressions; students identified how microaggressions affected their learning, academic performance, and personal wellness; and students had suggestions for promoting inclusion.ConclusionsThe data indicated that students perceived that their daily experiences were affected by racial microaggressions. Participants reported strong emotions while experiencing racial microaggressions including feeling stressed, frustrated, and angered by these interactions. Further, students believed microaggressions negatively affected their learning, academic performance, and overall well-being. This study shows the need for leadership and faculty of health professions schools to implement policies, practices, and instructional strategies that support and leverage diversity so that innovative problem-solving can emerge to better serve underserved communities and reduce health disparities.

Decision aids are evidenced-based tools designed to increase patient understanding of medical options and possible outcomes, facilitate conversation between patients and clinicians, and improve patient engagement. Decision aids have been used for shared decision making (SDM) interventions outside of the ED setting for more than a decade. Their use in the ED has only recently begun to be studied. This article provides background on this topic and the conclusions of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference SDM in practice work group regarding "Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant, Patient-Centered Research Agenda." The goal was to determine a prioritized research agenda for the development and testing of SDM interventions for use in emergency care that was most important to patients, clinicians, caregivers, and other key stakeholders. Using the nominal group technique, the consensus working group proposed prioritized research questions in six key domains: 1) content (i.e., clinical scenario or decision area), 2) level of evidence available, 3) tool design strategies, 4) risk communication, 5) stakeholders, and 6) outcomes.

BackgroundEarly recognition of trauma patients at risk for multiple organ failure (MOF) is important to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with MOF. The objective of the study was to externally validate the Denver Emergency Department (ED) Trauma Organ Failure (TOF) Score, a 6-item instrument that includes age, intubation, hematocrit, systolic blood pressure, blood urea nitrogen, and white blood cell count, which was designed to predict the development of MOF within 7 days of hospitalization.Study designWe performed a prospective multicenter study of adult trauma patients between November, 2011 and March, 2013. The primary outcome was development of MOF within 7 days of hospitalization, assessed using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score. Hierarchical logistic regression analysis was performed to determine associations between the Denver ED TOF Score and MOF. Discrimination was assessed and quantified using a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. The predictive accuracy of the Denver ED TOF score was compared with attending emergency physician estimation of the likelihood of MOF.ResultsWe included 2,072 patients with a median age of 46 years (interquartile range [IQR] 30 to 61 years); 68% were male. The median Injury Severity Score was 9 (IQR 5 to 17), and 88% of patients had blunt mechanism injury. Among participants, 1,024 patients (49%) were admitted to the ICU, and 77 (4%) died. Multiple organ failure occurred in 120 (6%; 95% CI 5% to 7%) patients and of these, 37 (31%; 95% CI 23% to 40%) died. The area under the ROC curve for the Denver ED TOF Score prediction of MOF was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.91) and for physician estimation of the likelihood of MOF was 0.78 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.83).ConclusionsThe Denver ED TOF Score predicts development of MOF within 7 days of hospitalization. Its predictive accuracy outperformed attending emergency physician estimation of the risk of MOF.

Objective: Examine the association between sex, race, ethnicity, and family income, and the intersectionality between these identities, and sustained or cultivated paths in surgery in medical school. Methods: This retrospective cohort study examines US medical students who matriculated in academic years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Data were provided by the Association of American Medical Colleges, including self-reported sex, race, ethnicity, family income, interest in surgery at matriculation, and successful placement into a surgical residency at graduation. This study examined 2 outcomes: (1) sustained path in surgery between matriculation and graduation for students who entered medical school with an interest in surgery and (2) cultivated path in surgery for students who entered medical school not initially interested in surgery and who applied to and were successfully placed into a surgical residency at graduation. Results: Among the 5074 students who reported interest in surgery at matriculation, 2108 (41.5%) had sustained path in surgery. Compared to male students, female students were significantly less likely to have sustained path in surgery [adjusted relative risk (aRR): 0.92 (0.85-0.98)], while Asian (aRR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.91), Hispanic (aRR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.59-0.83), and low-income (aRR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.92) students were less likely to have a sustained path in surgery compared to their peers. Among the 17,586 students who reported an initial interest in a nonsurgical specialty, 1869 (10.6%) were placed into a surgical residency at graduation. Female students, regardless of race/ethnic identity and income, were significantly less likely to have cultivated paths in surgery compared to male students, with underrepresented in medicine female students reporting the lowest rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrates the significant disparity in sustained and cultivated paths in surgery during undergraduate medical education. Innovative transformation of the surgical learning environment to promote surgical identity development and belonging for females, underrepresented in medicine, and low-income students is essential to diversify the surgical workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]