Advocacy: Achieving Physician Competency

How Are We Teaching Advocacy? A National Survey of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors

BACKGROUND

Although internal medicine (IM) physicians accept public advocacy as a professional responsibility, there is little evidence that IM training programs teach advocacy skills. The prevalence and characteristics of public advocacy curricula in US IM residency programs are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the prevalence and characteristics of curricula in US IM residencies addressing public advocacy for communities and populations; to describe barriers to the provision of such curricula.

DESIGN

Nationally representative, web-based, cross-sectional survey of IM residency program directors with membership in an academic professional association.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 276 IM residency program directors (61%) responded between August and December 2022.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Percentage of US IM residency programs that teach advocacy curricula; characteristics of advocacy curricula; perceptions of barriers to teaching advocacy.

KEY RESULTS

More than half of respondents reported that their programs offer no advocacy curricula (148/276, 53.6%). Ninety-five programs (95/276, 34.4%) reported required advocacy curricula; 33 programs (33/276, 12%) provided curricula as elective only. The content, structure, and teaching methods of advocacy curricula in IM programs were heterogeneous; experiential learning in required curricula was low (23/95, 24.2%) compared to that in elective curricula (51/65, 78.5%). The most highly reported barriers to implementing or improving upon advocacy curricula (multiple responses allowed) were lack of faculty expertise in advocacy (200/276, 72%), inadequate faculty time (190/276, 69%), and limited curricular flexibility (148/276, 54%).

CONCLUSION

Over half of US IM residency programs offer no formal training in public advocacy skills and many reported lack of faculty expertise in public advocacy as a barrier. These findings suggest many IM residents are not taught how to advocate for communities and populations. Further, less than one-quarter of required curricula in public advocacy involves experiential learning.

Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Advocacy is an integral component of a physician's professional responsibilities, yet efforts to teach advocacy skills in a systematic and comprehensive manner have been inconsistent and challenging. There is currently no consensus on the tools and content that should be included in advocacy curricula for graduate medical trainees.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of recently published GME advocacy curricula and delineate foundational concepts and topics in advocacy education that are pertinent to trainees across specialties and career paths.

METHODS

We conducted an updated systematic review based off Howell et al. (J Gen Intern Med 34(11):2592-2601, 2019) to identify articles published between September 2017 and March 2022 that described GME advocacy curricula developed in the USA and Canada. Searches of grey literature were used to find citations potentially missed by the search strategy. Articles were independently reviewed by two authors to identify those meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria; a third author resolved discrepancies. Three reviewers used a web-based interface to extract curricular details from the final selection of articles. Two reviewers conducted a detailed analysis of recurring themes in curricular design and implementation.

RESULTS

Of 867 articles reviewed, 26 articles, describing 31 unique curricula, met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The majority (84%) represented Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry programs. The most common learning methods included experiential learning, didactics, and project-based work. Most covered community partnerships (58%) and legislative advocacy (58%) as advocacy tools and social determinants of health (58%) as an educational topic. Evaluation results were inconsistently reported. Analysis of recurring themes showed that advocacy curricula benefit from an overarching culture supportive of advocacy education and should ideally be learner-centric, educator-friendly, and action-oriented.

DISCUSSION

Combining core features of advocacy curricula identified in prior publications with our findings, we propose an integrative framework to guide design and implementation of advocacy curricula for GME trainees. Additional research is needed to build expert consensus and ultimately develop model curricula for disseminated use.

Physician Advocacy: Identifying Motivations for Work Beyond Clinical Practice

Introduction

Advocacy is a perceived social and professional obligation of physicians. However, many feel their training and practice environment do not support increased engagement in advocacy. The aim of this qualitative project was to delineate the role that advocacy plays in physicians' careers and the factors driving physician engagement in advocacy.

Methods

Physicians engaged in health advocacy in Kansas were identified by personal contacts and referrals through snowball sampling. They received a standardized email invitation to participate in a short interview. These interviews were recorded and transcribed using Apple Voice Memos and Google Dictation. Two team members independently identified themes from interview transcripts, while a third member served as a moderator if themes identified were dyssynchronous.

Results

Of the 19 physicians invited to participate, 13 were interviewed. The most common reasons for engaging in advocacy included the desire to change policy, obligation to go beyond regular clinic duties, giving patients a voice, and avoiding burnout. Physicians reported passion for patients and past experiences with disparities as the most common inspiration. Most physicians did not receive formal advocacy training, but identified professional societies and peers as informal guides. Common supports for advocacy were professional organizations, community partners, and employers. Time was the most common barrier to conducting advocacy work.

Conclusions

Physicians have a broad number of reasons for the importance of doing advocacy work, but identify key professional barriers to further engagement. Providing accessible opportunities through professional organizations and community partnerships may increase advocacy participation.

The Role of Physician Advocacy in Achieving Health Equity: Where Is the Allergist-Immunologist?

As allergists and immunologists many of us have likely worked in the capacity of being an advocate for individual patients. However, how many of us are aware of our ability to be effective advocates who address root causes of health issues through policy changes? Physician advocacy is not a core competency medical specialty training (except pediatrics), yet physicians' clinical and research expertise and professional experience can be leveraged to shape policy. This rostrum describes the spectrum of activities for a physician advocate, barriers to physician advocacy, and actionable steps to encouraging the training and expansion of advocacy efforts by allergists and immunologists.

Spheres of Influence and Strategic Advocacy for Equity in Medicine

As the extent of health disparities in the USA has been revealed, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians have increasingly attended to their roles as advocates for their patients and communities. This article presents "spheres of influence" as a concept that can help physicians think strategically about how to build upon their clinical work and expertise to promote equity in medicine. The physician's primary sphere of influence is in direct patient care. However, physicians today often have many other roles, especially within larger health care institutions in which physicians often occupy positions of authority. Physicians are therefore well-positioned to act within these spheres in ways that draw upon the ethical principles that guide patient care and contribute materially to the cause of equity for colleagues and patients alike. By making changes to the ways they already work within their clinical spaces, institutional leadership roles, and wider communities, physicians can counteract the structural problems that undermine the health of the patients they serve.

Surreal Becomes Real: Ethical Dilemmas Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Professional Identity Formation of Health Professionals

Fundamental quandaries of clinical and biomedical ethics for health care professionals, committees, and systems have been raised into stark relief by the COVID-19 pandemic. The nature and extent of critical issues raised by this ongoing crisis, including challenging ethical dilemmas for the health care profession, is likely to have an indelible impact on the professional identity formation (PIF) of learners and practitioners across the trajectory of the professional lifecycle. The lifelong process of PIF for health care practitioners, from learner through independent practice, is supported in medical education by intentional reflection, relationships within community of practice include guidance from mentoring, as well as resilience, both emotional and moral. We consider how grappling with ethical dilemmas related to the COVID-19 pandemic can challenge, inform, and even potentially transform the PIF process, thereby supporting development of a morally resilient, humanistic professional identity in health care trainees and health care professionals.

An American Academy of Pediatrics State Chapter Initiative Advocating for Immigrant Children and Families

The Illinois Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics Refugee Immigrant Child Health Initiative (RICHI), a collaboration of physicians and child advocates, is one of the most robust state chapter programs of its kind. RICHI evolved by tapping into its key demographics to discern both patient needs and providers' skill sets. Although both may be unique to Illinois and its provider base, they can nonetheless provide a framework for creating and guiding state chapters to support the special needs of children in immigrant families. This article illustrates the importance of identifying and analyzing relevant local demographic and policy-related concerns and how to build capacity, connect to local resources, and form key partnerships. [Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(5):e228-e232.].