Imagining the 'structural' in medical education and practice in the United States: A curricular investigation.

A number of conceptual frameworks have emerged with the goal of helping clinicians understand and navigate the intersections of the health system and broader political, economic, and cultural processes when they care for patients. In this study, we analyze the impact that one emerging framework, "structural competency," had on medical students' and physicians' understanding of societal problems affecting patient health and the practices of health systems. In this sub-analysis of a longitudinal qualitative study conducted between August and December 2020, we analyzed 19 semi-structured interviews with 7 first-year medical students, 7 upper-level medical students, and 5 physician course facilitators who participated in a course called Introduction to Medicine and Society at an medical school in the United States affiliated with a large urban academic medical center. This paper focuses on three main findings: how medical students and faculty describe "structures" and their effects on patients and patient care; how they use or imagine using structural competency to improve patient-physician communication and work interprofessionally to address social needs; and the emotional and personal reactions that confronting societal challenges provokes. We conclude that structural competency enhances existing efforts to improve patient-physician communication and to address patients' social needs. However, we highlight how structural competency efforts might fall short of their goal to shift physicians' perspectives "upstream" to the determinants of health due to both critical ambiguities in the concept and inattention to the emotional and personal impacts of addressing societal problems in the clinic. These findings have practical implications for how clinicians are trained to act on societal issues from within the health system and conceptual implications for refining how existing frameworks and curricula conceive of the intersection between healthcare and broader processes. • Ambiguity of 'structure' and 'structural competency' hinders applicability. • Emphasis on 'structure' may unintentionally essentialize marginalized patients. • Trainees' affective responses are key to addressing societal factors in the clinic. • Humility and self-reflection helped trainees better address 'structure'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]