Academic Medicine's Journey Toward Racial Equity Must Be Grounded in History: Recommendations for Becoming an Antiracist Academic Medical Center

The harsh realities of racial inequities related to COVID-19 and civil unrest following police killings of unarmed Black men and women in the United States in 2020 heightened awareness of racial injustices around the world. Racism is deeply embedded in academic medicine, yet the nobility of medicine and nursing has helped health care professionals distance themselves from racism. Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), like many U.S. academic medical centers, affirmed its commitment to racial equity in summer 2020. A Racial Equity Task Force was charged with identifying barriers to achieving racial equity at the medical center and medical school and recommending key actions to rectify long-standing racial inequities. The task force, composed of students, staff, and faculty, produced more than 60 recommendations, and its work brought to light critical areas that need to be addressed in academic medicine broadly. To dismantle structural racism, academic medicine must: (1) confront medicine's racist past, which has embedded racial inequities in the U.S. health care system; (2) develop and require health care professionals to possess core competencies in the health impacts of structural racism; (3) recognize race as a sociocultural and political construct, and commit to debiologizing its use; (4) invest in benefits and resources for health care workers in lower-paid roles, in which racial and ethnic minorities are often overrepresented; and (5) commit to antiracism at all levels, including changing institutional policies, starting at the executive leadership level with a vision, metrics, and accountability.

Communicating to Engage: An Improvisational Theater-Based Communication Training Designed to Support Community-Academic Partnership Development

PROBLEM

The potential for community-engaged research to address health inequity requires deliberate effort to create trusting and equitable community-academic partnerships. A lack of evidence-based opportunities for cultivating such partnerships remains a barrier.

APPROACH

In 2017 and 2018, the authors designed, facilitated, and evaluated a mixed stakeholder training, Communicating to Engage, at 2 urban academic medical centers involved in the All of Us research program, Boston Medical Center and Mass General Brigham. The goal was to bring together researchers and community members to develop communication skills through improvisational theater-based co-learning. The curriculum was inspired by several evidence-based learning frameworks including community-based participatory research principles and improvisational theater techniques. A self-administered survey completed before and after the training session measured participants' communication skills using the Self-Perceived Communication Competence Scale (SPCCS) and comfort with specific communication styles as outlined in the program's training objectives. Paired t tests were used to measure changes in scaled responses among combined participants and separately among self-identified community members and researchers.

OUTCOMES

Sixty-nine total participants across 6 workshops completed training evaluations. Overall, pre-post survey analysis demonstrated significant mean score improvement for both the SPCCS and comfort with specific communication styles. In stratified analysis, both community members (n = 26) and researchers (n = 38) reported significant improvement in scores related to comfort with specific communication styles. Only researchers, but not community members, had significant improvement in SPCCS scores.

NEXT STEPS

The Communicating to Engage program brought community and researcher stakeholders together and demonstrated improvement in self-perceived communication styles, yet researcher participants benefited more than community participants. Future innovation is necessary to further target community stakeholder communication training needs. Mixed stakeholder improvisational theater-based learning provides deliberate opportunities to build new community-academic partnerships that may enhance health equity initiatives.

How Academic Medical Centers Can Navigate the Pandemic and Its Aftermath: Solutions for 3 Major Issues

The COVID-19 crisis has seriously affected academic medical centers (AMCs) on multiple levels. Combined with many trends that were already under way pre pandemic, the current situation has generated significant disruption and underscored the need for change within and across AMCs. In this article, the authors explore some of the major issues and propose actionable solutions in 3 areas of concentration. First, the impact on medical students is considered, particularly the trade-offs associated with online learning and the need to place greater pedagogical emphasis on virtual care delivery and other skills that will be increasingly in demand. Solutions described include greater utilization of technology, building more public health knowledge into the curriculum, and partnering with a wide range of academic disciplines. Second, leadership recruiting, vital to long-term success for AMCs, has been complicated by the crisis. Pressures discussed include adapting to the dynamics of competitive physician labor markets as well as attracting candidates with the skill sets to meet the requirements of a shifting AMC leadership landscape. Solutions proposed in this domain include making search processes more focused and streamlined, prioritizing creativity and flexibility as core management capabilities to be sought, and enhancing efforts with assistance from outside advisors. Finally, attention is devoted to the severe financial impact wrought by the pandemic, creating challenges whose resolution is central to planning future AMC directions. Specific challenges include recovery of lost clinical revenue and cash flow, determining how to deal with research funding, and the precarious economic balancing act engendered by the need to continue distance education. A full embrace of telehealth, collaborative policy-making among the many AMC constituencies, and committing fully to being in the vanguard of the transition to value-based care form the solution set offered.

Now Is Our Time to Act: Why Academic Medicine Must Embrace Community Collaboration as Its Fourth Mission

In his Leadership Plenary at the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) annual meeting, "Learn Serve Lead 2020: The Virtual Experience," president and CEO David Skorton emphasized that the traditional tripartite mission of academic medicine-medical education, clinical care, and research-is no longer enough to achieve health justice for all. Today, collaborating with diverse communities deserves equal weight among academic medicine's missions. This means going beyond "delivering care" to establishing and expanding ongoing, two-way community dialogues that push the envelope of what is possible in service to what is needed. It means appreciating community assets and creating ongoing pathways for listening to and learning from the needs, lived experiences, perspectives, and wisdom of patients, families, and communities. It means working with community-based organizations in true partnership to identify and address needs, and jointly develop, test, and implement solutions. This requires bringing medical care and public/population health concepts together and addressing upstream fundamental causes of health inequities. The authors call on academic medical institutions to do more to build a strong network of collaborators across public and population health, government, community groups, and the private sector. We in academic medicine must hold ourselves accountable for weaving community collaborations consistently throughout research, medical education, and clinical care. The authors recognize the AAMC can do better to support its member institutions in doing so and discuss new initiatives that signify a shift in emphasis through the association's new strategic plan and AAMC Center for Health Justice. The authors believe every area of academic medicine could grow and better serve communities by listening and engaging more and bringing medical care, public health, and other sectors closer together.

Approaching the COVID-19 Pandemic Response With a Health Equity Lens: A Framework for Academic Health Systems

Racially and ethnically diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities have historically been disproportionately affected by disasters and public health emergencies in the United States. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health established the National Consensus Panel on Emergency Preparedness and Cultural Diversity to provide guidance to agencies and organizations on developing effective strategies to advance emergency preparedness and eliminate disparities among racially and ethnically diverse communities during these crises. Adopting the National Consensus Panel recommendations, the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Health Equity; Language Services; and academic-community partnerships used existing health equity resources and expertise to develop an operational framework to support the organization's COVID-19 response and to provide a framework of health equity initiatives for other academic medical centers. This operational framework addressed policies to support health equity patient care and clinical operations, accessible COVID-19 communication, and staff and community support and engagement, which also supported the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care. Johns Hopkins Medicine identified expanded recommendations for addressing institutional policy making and capacity building, including unconscious bias training for resource allocation teams and staff training in accurate race, ethnicity, and language data collection, that should be considered in future updates to the National Consensus Panel's recommendations.

Returning to Growth: One Academic Medical Center's Successful Five-Step Approach to Change Management

The University of Alabama at Birmingham academic medical center (UAB AMC) had achieved great success and growth during the 50 years since its founding. However, the challenging and more competitive environment of the 2000s left the UAB AMC on a downward trajectory. The UAB AMC had to overcome difficult internal cultural and structural barriers that stood in the way of the transformational change needed to remain competitive. Competition rather than collaborative and strategic financial investment were the primary cultural barriers for the UAB AMC, while people were the primary structural barrier. Leadership identified 5 steps that were critical for the transformation that occurred between 2013 and 2018: alignment of leadership; creating a compelling and credible shared vision; identifying cultural and structural barriers; creating a thoughtful, data-driven intervention; and improved communication and accountability. Following these steps enabled the UAB AMC to transform its institutional structure and culture. As a result, the UAB AMC thrived, returning to substantial growth in research and clinical care. UAB AMC School of Medicine grew by $100 million in National Institutes of Health funding and moved up 10 spots in ranking. In 2018, UAB Hospital had 10 specialties ranked by U.S. News & World Report, 7 more than in 2013. This article outlines the approach taken and provides a conceptual framework for other AMCs eager to transform their structure and culture and position themselves for growth.

The Importance of Formalized, Lifelong Physician Career Development: Making the Case for a Paradigm Shift

The value of structured development processes has been recognized and implemented in formal physician training programs such as residencies and fellowships. Physicians are seemingly viewed as a "finished product" upon completing formal training. In recent years, a number of academic medical centers have implemented formalized early-career development programs for physicians, largely those who have a major research focus. However, beyond the early stage of physicians' careers, formalized and intentional physician career development programs are rare. The lack of a philosophy of intentional, career-long individual development at academic medical centers reflects a narrow understanding of the implicit contract between employers and employees. The resulting gap leads the vast majority of physicians to fall short of their potential, further leading to long-term loss for the academic medical centers, their physicians, and society as a whole. Based on the framework of analyze-design-develop-implement-evaluate, the authors propose a robust, iterative model for physician career development that goes beyond skills and knowledge maintenance toward leveraging a broad range of individual capabilities, needs, and contexts along the career lifespan. The model provides a means for harnessing physicians' strengths and passions in concert with the needs of their organization to create greater physician fulfillment and success, which in turn would benefit the patients they care for and the academic medical centers in which they work.

Validation of a Crisis Standards of Care Model for Prioritization of Limited Resources During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Crisis in an Urban, Safety-Net, Academic Medical Center

OBJECTIVES

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare resources even in wealthy nations, necessitating rationing of limited resources without previously established crisis standards of care protocols. In Massachusetts, triage guidelines were designed based on acute illness and chronic life-limiting conditions. In this study, we sought to retrospectively validate this protocol to cohorts of critically ill patients from our hospital.

DESIGN

We applied our hospital-adopted guidelines, which defined severe and major chronic conditions as those associated with a greater than 50% likelihood of 1- and 5-year mortality, respectively, to a critically ill patient population. We investigated mortality for the same intervals.

SETTING

An urban safety-net hospital ICU.

PATIENTS

All adults hospitalized during April of 2015 and April 2019 identified through a clinical database search.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 365 admitted patients, 15.89% had one or more defined chronic life-limiting conditions. These patients had higher 1-year (46.55% vs 13.68%; p < 0.01) and 5-year (50.00% vs 17.22%; p < 0.01) mortality rates than those without underlying conditions. Irrespective of classification of disease severity, patients with metastatic cancer, congestive heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and neurodegenerative disease had greater than 50% 1-year mortality, whereas patients with chronic lung disease and cirrhosis had less than 50% 1-year mortality. Observed 1- and 5-year mortality for cirrhosis, heart failure, and metastatic cancer were more variable when subdivided into severe and major categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with major and severe chronic medical conditions overall had 46.55% and 50.00% mortality at 1 and 5 years, respectively. However, mortality varied between conditions. Our findings appear to support a crisis standards protocol which focuses on acute illness severity and only considers underlying conditions carrying a greater than 50% predicted likelihood of 1-year mortality. Modifications to the chronic lung disease, congestive heart failure, and cirrhosis criteria should be refined if they are to be included in future models.

Learning From What We Do, and Doing What We Learn: A Learning Health Care System in Action

Different models of learning health systems are emerging. At Vanderbilt University Medical Center, the Learning Health Care System (LHS) Platform was established with the goal of creating generalizable knowledge. This differentiates the LHS Platform from other efforts that have adopted a quality improvement paradigm. By supporting pragmatic trials at the intersection of research, operations, and clinical care, the LHS Platform was designed to yield evidence for advancing content and processes of care through carefully designed, rigorous study. The LHS Platform provides the necessary infrastructure and governance to leverage translational, transdisciplinary team science to inform clinical and operational decision making across the health system. The process transforms a clinical or operational question into a research question amenable to a pragmatic trial. Scientific, technical, procedural, and human infrastructure is maintained for the design and execution of individual LHS projects. This includes experienced pragmatic trialists, project management, data science inclusive of biostatistics and clinical informatics, and regulatory support. Careful attention is paid to stakeholder engagement, including health care providers and the community. Capturing lessons from each new study, the LHS Platform continues to mature with plans to integrate implementation science and to complement clinical and process outcomes with cost and value considerations. The Vanderbilt University Medical Center LHS Platform is now a pillar of the health care system and leads the evolving culture of learning from what we do and doing what we learn.

Embedding Learning in a Learning Health Care System to Improve Clinical Practice

PROBLEM

In an ideal learning health care system (LHS), clinicians learn from what they do and do what they learn, closing the evidence-to-practice gap. In operationalizing an LHS, great strides have been made in knowledge generation. Yet, considerable challenges remain to the broad uptake of identified best practices. To bridge the gap from generating actionable knowledge to applying that knowledge in clinical practice, and ultimately to improving outcomes, new information must be disseminated to and implemented by frontline clinicians. To date, the dissemination of this knowledge through traditional avenues has not achieved meaningful practice change quickly.

APPROACH

Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) developed QuizTime, a smartphone application learning platform, to provide a mechanism for embedding workplace-based clinician learning in the LHS. QuizTime leverages spaced education and retrieval-based practice to facilitate practice change. Beginning in January 2020, clinician-researchers and educators at VUMC designed a randomized, controlled trial to test whether the QuizTime learning system influenced clinician behavior in the context of recent evidence supporting the use of balanced crystalloids rather than saline for intravenous fluid management and new regulations around opioid prescribing.

OUTCOMES

Whether spaced education and retrieval-based practice influence clinician behavior and patient outcomes at the VUMC system level will be tested using the data currently being collected.

NEXT STEPS

These findings will inform future directions for developing and deploying learning approaches at scale in an LHS, with the goal of closing the evidence-to-practice gap.

Supporting Frontline Staff During the COVID-19 Pandemic

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that emerged in early 2020 put unprecedented physical, mental, and emotional strain on the staff of health care organizations, who have been caring for a critically ill patient population for more than a year and a half. Amid the ongoing pandemic, health care workers have struggled to keep up with new information about the disease, while also coping with the anxiety associated with caring for affected patients. It has also been a continual challenge for nurse leaders to provide adequate support for staff members and keep them informed about frequently changing practices and protocols. In this article, nursing leaders at an academic medical center in Boston reflect on the initial COVID-19 patient surge, which occurred from March to June 2020, and identify key actions taken to provide clinical and emotional support to frontline staff who cared for these patients. Lessons learned in this period provide insight into the management of redeployed staff, use of emotional support and debriefing, and relationship between access to information and staff morale. The knowledge gained through these initial experiences has been a vital resource as health care workers continue to face challenges associated with the ongoing pandemic.

Overall Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Interventional Radiology Services: A Canadian Perspective

PURPOSE

The aim of this national survey was to assess the overall impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the provision of interventional radiology (IR) services in Canada.

METHODS

An anonymous electronic survey was distributed via national and regional radiology societies, exploring (1) center information and staffing, (2) acute and on-call IR services, (3) elective IR services, (4) IR clinics, (5) multidisciplinary rounds, (6) IR training, (7) personal protection equipment (PPE), and departmental logistics.

RESULTS

Individual responses were received from 142 interventional radiologists across Canada (estimated 70% response rate). Nearly half of the participants (49.3%) reported an overall decrease in demand for acute IR services; on-call services were maintained at centers that routinely provide these services (99%). The majority of respondents (73.2%) were performing inpatient IR procedures at the bedside where possible. Most participants (88%) reported an overall decrease in elective IR services. Interventional radiology clinics and multidisciplinary rounds were predominately transitioned to virtual platforms. The vast majority of participants (93.7%) reported their center had disseminated an IR specific PPE policy; 73% reported a decrease in case volume for trainees by at least 25% and a proportion of trainees will either have a delay in starting their careers as IR attendings (24%) or fellowship training (35%).

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on IR services in Canada, particularly for elective cases. Many centers have utilized virtual platforms to provide multidisciplinary meetings, IR clinics, and training. Guidelines should be followed to ensure patient and staff safety while resuming IR services.

Venous thromboembolism and COVID-19: a single center experience from an academic tertiary referral hospital of Northern Italy

Preliminary evidence supports the notion that COVID-19 patients may have an increased susceptibility to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, the magnitude of this association still needs to be defined. Furthermore, clinical predictors of thrombogenesis, and the relationship with the inflammatory status are currently unknown. On this basis, we conducted a retrospective, observational study on 259 consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to an academic tertiary referral hospital in Northern Italy between March 19th and April 6th, 2020. Records of COVID-19 patients with a definite VTE event were reviewed for demographic information, co-morbidities, risk factors for VTE, laboratory tests, and anticoagulation treatment. Twenty-five cases among 259 COVID-19 patients developed VTE (9.6%), all of them having a Padua score > 4, although being under standard anticoagulation prophylaxis since hospital admission. In the VTE subcohort, we found a significant positive correlation between platelet count (PLT) and either C reactive protein (CRP) (p < 0.0001) or lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (p = 0.0013), while a significant inverse correlation was observed between PLT and mean platelet volume (p < 0.0001). Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio significantly correlated with CRP (p < 0.0001). The majority of VTE patients was male and younger compared to non-VTE patients (p = 0.002 and p = 0.005, respectively). No significant difference was found in D-dimer levels between VTE and non VTE patients, while significantly higher levels of LDH (p = 0.04) and IL-6 (p = 0.04) were observed in VTE patients in comparison to non-VTE patients. In conclusion, our findings showed a quite high prevalence of VTE in COVID-19 patients. Raised inflammatory indexes and increased serum levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines should raise the clinical suspicion of VTE.

Design of a Situational Judgment Test for Preclinical Interprofessional Collaboration

PROBLEM

There is an unmet need for economically feasible, valid, reliable, and contextually relevant assessments of interprofessional collaborative knowledge and skills, particularly at the early stages of health professions education. This study sought to develop and gather content and internal structure validity for an Interprofessional Situational Judgement Test (IPSJT), a tool for the measurement of students' interprofessional collaborative intentions during the early stages of their professional development.

APPROACH

After engaging in an item development and refinement process (January-June 2018), an 18-question IPSJT was administered to 953 first-year students enrolled in 10 health professions degree programs at the University of Florida Health Science Center in October 2018. The IPSJT's performance was evaluated using item-level analyses, item difficulty, test-retest reliability, and exploratory factor analysis.

OUTCOMES

Seven hundred thirty-seven (77.3%) students consented to the use of their data. Student IPSJT scores ranged from 0 to 69, averaging 42.68 (standard deviation = 12.28), with some statistically significant differences in student performance by health professions degree program. IPSJT item difficulties ranged from 0.13 to 0.92. Once one item with poor properties was excluded from analysis, the IPSJT demonstrated an overall reliability of 0.62. Students were more successful at identifying the least effective than the most effective responses. Test-retest reliability provided evidence of consistency (r = 0.50, P < .001) and similar item difficulty across administrations. An exploratory factor analysis indicated a 3-factor model with multiple cross-factor loadings.

NEXT STEPS

This work represents the first step toward the development of a valid, reliable IPSJT for early learners. The emergent 3-factor model provides evidence that multiple competencies can be assessed in early learners via this tool. Additional research is necessary to build a more robust question bank, explore different scoring and response methods, and gather additional sources of validity evidence, including relations to other variables.

Career Development Considerations for Academic Physician Mentees and Mentors in the Time of COVID-19: Jump in or Just Dip a Toe?

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted medical research, pushing mentors and mentees to decide if COVID-19 research would be germane to the early career investigator's developing research portfolio. With COVID-19 halting hundreds of federal trials involving non-COVID-19 research, mentors and mentees must also consider the broader moral calling of contributing to COVID-19 research. At the time of writing, the National Institutes of Health had responded to the pandemic with significant funding for COVID-19 research. However, because this pandemic is a new phenomenon, few mentors have expertise in the disease and relevant established resources. As a result, many mentors are unable to provide insight on COVID-19 research to early career investigators considering a pivot toward research related to this disease. The authors suggest 4 ways for mentees and mentors to respond to the changes the pandemic has brought to research funding and opportunities: (1) include COVID-19 research in existing portfolios to diversify intellectual opportunities and reduce funding risks; (2) negotiate the mentor-mentee relationship and roles and expectations early in project discussions-considering, as relevant, the disproportionate burden of home responsibilities often borne by early career faculty members who are women and/or from a minority group; (3) address any mentor limitations in content expertise; and (4) if the decision is to pivot to COVID-19 research, select projects with implications generalizable beyond this pandemic to other infectious outbreaks or to the redesign of health care delivery. Mentors and mentees must weigh the relevance of COVID-19 research projects to the postpandemic world and the amount of available funding against the developing interests of early career investigators. Academic medical centers nationwide must enable seasoned and early career researchers to contribute meaningfully to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 research.

Examining the Educational Value of Student-Run Clinics for Health Care Students

PURPOSE

Student-run clinics (SRCs) are increasingly recognized as an educational experience in many health professions' curricula. Several benefits have been documented, including students with SRC experience using patient-centered approaches to care, showing interest in working with marginalized populations, and more fully appreciating the care provided by interprofessional teams. Yet, few studies have explored student experiences within SRCs or examined how these experiences affect and shape these documented attitudes. This study explored the experiences of students at an SRC and the effect of these experiences on their learnings.

METHOD

From November 2016 to July 2017, 23 students in the Community Health Initiative by University Students SRC at the University of British Columbia participated in 2 focus group interviews: the first after their first clinic day and the second on their final clinic day. Open- and closed-ended questions were used to explore participants' learnings from the SRC. Using a grounded theory approach, the authors iteratively analyzed the transcribed interviews, adjusting questions for subsequent focus groups as new themes evolved. Three investigators each separately coded the data; the full team then collectively consolidated the themes and developed explanatory models for each theme.

RESULTS

Two themes were identified from the focus group input: (1) through managing real, complex patients-in situations unlike those offered in classroom and case-based learning environments-students gained insights into the intricacies of incorporating the patient's perspective into their definition and management of the patient's problem, and (2) by working as a team instead of focusing on delineating scopes of practice, students gained a meaningful understanding of the roles of practitioners from other health professions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insights into the unique opportunities SRCs offer health care students early in their training, enabling them to develop a richer understanding and appreciation of holistic and interprofessional approaches to patient care.

Literature Review and Knowledge Distribution During an Outbreak: A Methodology for Managing Infodemics

PROBLEM

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged health care systems in an unprecedented way by imposing new demands on health care resources and scientific knowledge. There has also been an exceedingly fast accumulation of new information on this novel virus. As the traditional peer-review process takes time, there is currently a significant gap between the ability to generate new data and the ability to critically evaluate them. This problem of an excess of mixed-quality data, or infodemic, is echoing throughout the scientific community.

APPROACH

The authors aimed to help their colleagues at the Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel, manage the COVID-19 infodemic with a methodologic solution: establishing an in-house mechanism for continuous literature review and knowledge distribution (March-April 2020). Their methodology included the following building blocks: a dedicated literature review team, artificial intelligence-based research algorithms, brief written updates in a graphical format, large-scale webinars and online meetings, and a feedback loop.

OUTCOMES

During the first month (April 2020), the project produced 21 graphical updates. After consideration of feedback from colleagues and final editing, 13 graphical updates were uploaded to the center's website; of these, 31% addressed the clinical presentation of the disease and 38% referred to specific treatments. This methodology as well as the graphical updates it generated were adopted by the Israeli Ministry of Health and distributed in a hospital preparation kit.

NEXT STEPS

The authors believe they have established a novel methodology that can assist in the battle against COVID-19 by making high-quality scientific data more accessible to clinicians. In the future, they expect this methodology to create a favorable uniform standard for evidence-guided health care during infodemics. Further evolution of the methodology may include evaluation of its long-term sustainability and impact on the day-to-day clinical practice and self-confidence of clinicians who treat COVID-19 patients.

Length and Redundancy of Outpatient Progress Notes Across a Decade at an Academic Medical Center

IMPORTANCE

There is widespread concern that clinical notes have grown longer and less informative over the past decade. Addressing these concerns requires a better understanding of the magnitude, scope, and potential causes of increased note length and redundancy.

OBJECTIVE

To measure changes between 2009 and 2018 in the length and redundancy of outpatient progress notes across multiple medical specialties and investigate how these measures associate with author experience and method of note entry.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at Oregon Health & Science University, a large academic medical center. Participants included clinicians and staff who wrote outpatient progress notes between 2009 and 2018 for a random sample of 200 000 patients. Statistical analysis was performed from March to August 2020.

EXPOSURES

Use of a comprehensive electronic health record to document patient care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Note length, note redundancy (ie, the proportion of text identical to the patient's last note), and percentage of templated, copied, or directly typed note text.

RESULTS

A total of 2 704 800 notes written by 6228 primary authors across 46 specialties were included in this study. Median note length increased 60.1% (99% CI, 46.7%-75.2%) from a median of 401 words (interquartile range [IQR], 225-660 words) in 2009 to 642 words (IQR, 399-1007 words) in 2018. Median note redundancy increased 10.9 percentage points (99% CI, 7.5-14.3 percentage points) from 47.9% in 2009 to 58.8% in 2018. Notes written in 2018 had a mean value of just 29.4% (99% CI, 28.2%-30.7%) directly typed text with the remaining 70.6% of text being templated or copied. Mixed-effect linear models found that notes with higher proportions of templated or copied text were significantly longer and more redundant (eg, in the 2-year model, each 1% increase in the proportion of copied or templated note text was associated with 1.5% [95% CI, 1.5%-1.5%] and 1.6% [95% CI, 1.6%-1.6%] increases in note length, respectively). Residents and fellows also wrote significantly (26.3% [95% CI, 25.8%-26.7%]) longer notes than more senior authors, as did more recent hires (1.8% for each year later [95% CI, 1.3%-2.4%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, outpatient progress notes grew longer and more redundant over time, potentially limiting their use in patient care. Interventions aimed at reducing outpatient progress note length and redundancy may need to simultaneously address multiple factors such as note template design and training for both new and established clinicians.

Machine Scoring of Medical Students' Written Clinical Reasoning: Initial Validity Evidence

PURPOSE

Developing medical students' clinical reasoning requires a structured longitudinal curriculum with frequent targeted assessment and feedback. Performance-based assessments, which have the strongest validity evidence, are currently not feasible for this purpose because they are time-intensive to score. This study explored the potential of using machine learning technologies to score one such assessment-the diagnostic justification essay.

METHOD

From May to September 2018, machine scoring algorithms were trained to score a sample of 700 diagnostic justification essays written by 414 third-year medical students from the Southern Illinois University School of Medicine classes of 2012-2017. The algorithms applied semantically based natural language processing metrics (e.g., coherence, readability) to assess essay quality on 4 criteria (differential diagnosis, recognition and use of findings, workup, and thought process); the scores for these criteria were summed to create overall scores. Three sources of validity evidence (response process, internal structure, and association with other variables) were examined.

RESULTS

Machine scores correlated more strongly with faculty ratings than faculty ratings did with each other (machine: .28-.53, faculty: .13-.33) and were less case-specific. Machine scores and faculty ratings were similarly correlated with medical knowledge, clinical cognition, and prior diagnostic justification. Machine scores were more strongly associated with clinical communication than were faculty ratings (.43 vs .31).

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning technologies may be useful for assessing medical students' long-form written clinical reasoning. Semantically based machine scoring may capture the communicative aspects of clinical reasoning better than faculty ratings, offering the potential for automated assessment that generalizes to the workplace. These results underscore the potential of machine scoring to capture an aspect of clinical reasoning performance that is difficult to assess with traditional analytic scoring methods. Additional research should investigate machine scoring generalizability and examine its acceptability to trainees and educators.

Meeting the Patient Care, Education, and Research Missions: Academic Medical Centers Must Comprehensively Address Sexual and Gender Minority Health

While sociopolitical advances have improved the rights of sexual and gender minorities (i.e., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer [LGBTQ+] persons), they continue to face a health system that discriminates against them and does not provide competent, comprehensive care. Despite calls for advancing research, there remains limited sexual and gender minority health research funding, mentorship, and institutional support. Academic medical centers are best suited to systematically tackle disparities and improve care for all sexual and gender minority people through their tripartite missions of patient care, education, and research. In this article, the authors outline discrimination experienced by LGBTQ+ persons and highlight the unique disparities they experience across access and outcomes. The authors posit that by systematically improving clinical care of, incorporating education and training about, and research with LGBTQ+ people into their core missions, academic medical centers can dramatically change the health care landscape. Academic medical centers can eliminate health disparities, expand necessary research endeavors about sexual and gender minorities, and prepare the health care workforce to address the unique needs of these overlooked populations.

The IWill MCW Campaign: Individual Actions to Advance Gender Equity

Advancing equity for women remains an urgent and complex problem at academic health centers. Attempts to mitigate gender gaps have ranged widely and have been both slow to occur and limited in effect. Recognizing the limitations of previously attempted solutions and fueled by the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements, the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) stepped outside known approaches (e.g., women's leadership plans and programming) to design and implement a strategic campaign that promotes gender equity through fostering change in systems and social norms. This campaign, IWill MCW (launched in 2019), emphasizes the power of individual responsibility for positive change. The IWill MCW campaign employs a 2-pronged approach. The first is the creation of personal call-to-action public pledges focused on 5 aspects of gender equity, along with the provision of supportive resources to reinforce positive change. The second is the use of those pledges to raise awareness of gender inequity in academic medicine by fostering meaningful dialogue meant to alter mental models of equity, relationships, and power dynamics. In the initial 6-week phase of the IWill MCW campaign, leaders reached out to all MCW faculty (2,002), staff (4,522), and learners (1,483) at multiple campuses. This outreach resulted in nearly 1,400 pledges, including 30% (n = 420) from men. The effort also engaged over 90% (n = 101) of members of MCW senior leadership teams. The feedback from the initial campaign has been positive. Lessons learned include realizing the importance of public pledges, engaging male allies, and following up. The authors suggest that the IWill MCW campaign provides a model for academic health centers to advance gender equity and shape an environment in which people of all genders can thrive.

Academic Medicine Faculty Perceptions of Work-Life Balance Before and Since the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

How the COVID-19 pandemic has affected academic medicine faculty's work-life balance is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of perceived work-life conflict with academic medicine faculty intention to leave, reducing employment to part time, or declining leadership opportunities before and since the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

An anonymous online survey of medical, graduate, and health professions school faculty was conducted at a single large, urban academic medical center between September 1 and September 25, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Self-assessed intention to leave, reducing employment to part time, or turning down leadership opportunities because of work-life conflict before and since the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Of the 1186 of 3088 (38%) of faculty members who answered the survey, 649 (55%) were women and 682 (58%) were White individuals. Respondents were representative of the overall faculty demographic characteristics except for an overrepresentation of female faculty respondents and underrepresentation of Asian faculty respondents compared with all faculty (female faculty: 649 [55%] vs 1368 [44%]; Asian faculty: 259 [22%] vs 963 [31%]). After the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty were more likely to consider leaving or reducing employment to part time compared with before the pandemic (leaving: 225 [23%] vs 133 [14%]; P < .001; reduce hours: 281 [29%] vs 206 [22%]; P < .001). Women were more likely than men to reduce employment to part time before the COVID-19 pandemic (153 [28%] vs 44 [12%]; P < .001) and to consider both leaving or reducing employment to part time since the COVID-19 pandemic (leaving: 154 [28%] vs 56 [15%]; P < .001; reduce employment: 215 [40%] vs 49 [13%]; P < .001). Faculty with children were more likely to consider leaving and reducing employment since the COVID-19 pandemic compared with before the pandemic (leaving: 159 [29%] vs 93 [17%]; P < .001; reduce employment: 213 [40%] vs 130 [24%]; P < .001). Women with children compared with women without children were also more likely to consider leaving since the COVID-19 pandemic than before (113 [35%] vs 39 [17%]; P < .001). Working parent faculty and women were more likely to decline leadership opportunities both before (faculty with children vs without children: 297 [32%] vs 84 [9%]; P < .001; women vs men: 206 [29%] vs 47 [13%]; P < .001) and since the COVID-19 pandemic (faculty with children vs faculty without children: 316 [34%] vs 93 [10 %]; P < .001; women vs men: 148 [28%] vs 51 [14%]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this survey study, the perceived stressors associated with work-life integration were higher in women than men, were highest in women with children, and have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The association of both gender and parenting with increased perceived work-life stress may disproportionately decrease the long-term retention and promotion of junior and midcareer women faculty.

Evaluation of Equitable Racial and Ethnic Representation Among Departmental Chairs in Academic Medicine, 1980-2019

This cross-sectional study evaluates racial and ethnic representation among departmental chairs and faculty in academic medicine in the US from 1980 to 2019.