Search

Background : Healthcare professionals have negative implicit biases toward minority and poor patients. Few communication skills interventions target implicit bias as a factor contributing to disparities in health outcomes. We report the protocol from the COmmuNity-engaged SimULation Training for Blood Pressure Control (CONSULT-BP), a trial evaluating a novel intervention targeting graduate medical and nursing trainees designed to mitigate the effects of implicit bias in clinical encounters. The CONSULT-BP intervention combines knowledge acquisition, bias awareness, and practice of bias mitigating skills in simulation-based communication encounters with racially/ethnically diverse standardized patients. The trial evaluates the effect of this 3-part program on patient BP outcomes, self-reported patient medication adherence, patient-reported quality of provider communication, and trainee bias awareness.Methods : We are conducting a cluster randomized trial of the intervention among cohorts of internal medicine (IM), family medicine (FM), and doctorate nurse practitioner (DNP) trainees at a single academic medical center. We are enrolling entire specialty cohorts of IM, FM, and NP trainees over a 3-year period, with each academic year constituting an intervention cycle. There are 3 cycles of implementation corresponding to 3 sequential academic years. Within each academic year, we randomize training times to 1 of 5 start dates using a stepped wedge design. The stepped wedge design compares outcomes within training clusters before and after the intervention, as well as across exposed and unexposed clusters. Primary outcome of blood pressure control is measured at the patient-level for patients clustered within trainees. Eligible patients for outcomes analysis are: English-speaking; non-White racial/ethnic minority; Medicaid recipient (regardless of race/ethnicity); hypertension; not have pregnancy, dementia, schizophrenia, bipolar illness, or other serious comorbidities that would interfere with hypertension self-control; not enrolled in hospice. Secondary outcomes include trainee bias awareness. A unique feature of this trial is the engagement of academic and community stakeholders to design, pilot test and implement a training program addressing healthcare.Discussion: Equipping clinicians with skills to mitigate implicit bias in clinical encounters is crucial to addressing persistent disparities in healthcare outcomes. Our novel, integrated approach may improve patient outcomes.Trial registration : NCT03375918Protocol version : 2.0 (October 16, 2020)

Residency programs have been integral to the development, expansion and progression of family medicine as a discipline. Three reports formed the foundation for graduate medical education in family medicine: Meeting the Challenge of Family Practice, The Graduate Education of Physicians, and Health is a Community Affair. In addition, the original core concepts of comprehensiveness, coordination, continuity, and patient centeredness continue to serve as the foundation for residency training in family medicine. While the Residency Review Committee for Family Medicine of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has provided the requirements for training throughout the years, key organizations including the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, and the American Board of Family Medicine have provided resources for and supported innovation in programs. Residency Program Solutions, National Institute for Program Director Development, and Family Medicine Residency Curriculum Resource are several of the resources developed by these organizations. The future of family medicine residency training should continue the emphasis on innovation and development of resources to enhance the training of residents. Areas for further development include leadership and health care systems training that allows residents to assume leadership of multidisciplinary health care teams and increase focus on the family medicine practice population as the main unit for resident education.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has recognized the importance of quality improvement (QI) training and requires that accredited residencies in all specialties demonstrate that residents are "integrated and actively participate in interdisciplinary clinical quality improvement and patient safety activities." However, competing demands in residency training may make this difficult to accomplish. The study's objective is to develop and evaluate a longitudinal curriculum that meets the ACGME requirement for QI and patient safety training and links to patient-centered medical home (PCMH) practices.Residents in the Worcester Family Medicine Residency (WFMR) participated in a faculty-developed quality improvement curriculum that included web-based tutorials, quality improvement projects, and small-group sessions across all 3 years of residency. They completed self-evaluations of knowledge and use of curricular activities annually and at graduation, and comparisons were made between two graduating classes, as well as comparison of end of PGY2 to end of PGY3 for one class.Graduating residents who completed the full 3 years of the curriculum rated themselves as significantly more skilled in nine of 15 areas assessed at end of residency compared to after PGY2 and reported confidence in providing future leadership in a focus group. Five areas were also rated significantly higher than prior-year residents.Involving family medicine residents in a longitudinal curriculum with hands-on practice in implementing QI, patient safety, and chronic illness management activities that are inclusive of PCMH goals increased their self-perceived skills and leadership ability to implement these new and emerging evidence-based practices in primary care.

Little is known about the impact of hospitalists on family medicine residencies. We surveyed family medicine residency directors to assess attitudes about hospitalists and their involvement in residency teaching.Questions were included in the 2012 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey of family medicine residency directors. Univariate statistics were used to describe programs, directors, and our questions on the use of hospitalists. Bivariate statistics were used to examine relationships between the use of hospitalists to teach and program characteristics.Forty-one percent (n=175) of residency directors completed the hospitalist section of the CERA survey. Sixty-six percent of residency programs were community based/university affiliated. The majority of directors who have, or are planning to develop, a hospitalist service currently use an internal medicine service (92.5%), followed by family medicine (39.1%), pediatrics (35.4%), OB/laborists (18.0%), and combined services (8.7%). The majority of programs with a hospitalist training track (or plans to develop one) indicated that this was for a family medicine service. Sixty percent of programs that have a hospitalist service involve hospitalists in teaching. Twenty percent of directors reported that hospitalists serve as family medicine faculty, and 63% viewed them as "good educators." However, 85% reported no reduction in inpatient teaching by family medicine faculty despite using hospitalist teaching services.Hospitalists have a significant educational role in family medicine resident training. Further research is needed to explore how hospitalists and family medicine faculty can collaborate to promote enhanced efficiency and effectiveness as residency teachers.