Improving Interprofessional Communication Skills for Senior Medical Students Pursuing Pediatrics

Inequities at the Transition to Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency

OBJECTIVE

Although approximately one-fifth of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residents matriculate from osteopathic or international medical schools, most literature regarding the transition to residency focuses on allopathic medical school graduates. To create comprehensive interventions for this educational transition, we must understand the needs of all incoming residents. Our objective was to examine OBGYN residents' perceptions of their transition to residency, and to understand how residents' background and medical school environment influence their perceived sense of readiness.

DESIGN

A 16-item survey asked questions about demographics, the transition to residency, resident well-being, burnout, and the transition to fellowship. Perception of preparedness was assessed with the question "I felt that I was well-prepared for the first year of residency" (1=strongly agree, 5=strongly disagree). Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression explored association of perceived preparedness with residents' backgrounds.

SETTING

Survey administered at time of the in-training examination in 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

All OBGYN residents.

RESULTS

Of 5761 eligible participants, 3741 (64.9%) provided consent and completed the survey. Of the 3687 participants who answered the question, 2441 (66.2%) either agreed or strongly agreed that they felt well-prepared. Fewer osteopathic graduates reported feeling prepared compared to allopathic graduates (379/610, 62.1% vs 1,924/2,766, 69.6%) (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.60-0.86, p < 0.01). International medical school graduates were seven times less likely to report feeling prepared compared to those from allopathic institutions (137/304, 45.1% vs 1924/2776, 69.6%) (OR 0.60, 95%CI 0.53-0.68, p < 0.01). Respondents from underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds were less likely to report feeling prepared compared to White respondents (276/535, 51.6% vs 1738/2387, 72.8%) (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.33-0.48, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in residents' perceptions of their transition to residency highlight the need to begin offsetting pervasive inequities with comprehensive and accessible resources.

More is not better: A scoping review of simulation in transition to residency programs

BACKGROUND

Transition to residency programs frequently use simulation to promote clinical skills but place limited emphasis on non-clinical skills. We conducted a scoping review to determine how simulation is being used in transition to residency programs and the key non-clinical skills addressed by simulation activities and tools in these programs.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Embase to identify articles addressing transition to residency, simulation, and non-clinical skills/attributes. Two authors independently screened all abstracts and full-text articles and identified non-clinical attributes elicited in each study. Using descriptive statistics, we characterized the simulation activities and tools and the number and type of non-clinical attributes captured in the programs. Using analysis of variance, we compared the number of non-clinical attributes elicited based on the number of simulation activities used and compared the number of non-clinical attributes elicited based on the number of simulation tools used.

RESULTS

We identified 38 articles that met the study criteria. We characterized simulation activities as mock paging (37%), case-based scenarios (74%), and/or procedural skills training (39%). We found that the most common simulation tools were standardized patients (64.8%), and the most elicited non-clinical attributes were communication skills, critical thinking, and teamwork. Using more simulation activity categories or simulation tools did not increase the number of non-clinical skills elicited.

CONCLUSION

Simulation is used broadly in transition to residency programs but provides training in a few of the non-clinical skills required for a successful transition. Incorporating more simulation activities or tools does not increase the number of non-clinical attributes elicited, illustrating the importance of developing more targeted simulation activities to promote non-clinical skills more effectively.

Implementation and Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence Driven Simulation to Improve Resident Communication With Primary Care Providers

Our artificial intelligence platform facilitated, evaluated, and provided real-time feedback on a standardized, simulated conversation. Learners evaluated the experience as equally effective to traditional education modalities and reported that it reinforced key communication elements, which would impact their future communication.

Interprofessional experiences to bridge the medical school to residency transition: a pilot program

Interprofessional experiences during medical school are often delivered during pre-clinical years, but less is known about the value of clinical students. Our institution implemented a specialty-specific interprofessiona curriculum during Residency Preparation Courses (RPCs) for senior students including didactics, clinical experiences, and a simulated paging curriculum. Our aim was to determine whether this intervention improved perceptions of interprofesiona roles. We distributed anonymous surveys before (pre-survey) and after (post-survey, collected within 2 weeks of course completion) the RPC to 90 students with questions related to interprofessional roles using a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Three months after the start of residency, we sent follow-up surveys inquiring about the usefulness of RPC components (1 = not at all useful, 5 = extremely useful). Response rates were 84.4% pre-survey, 63.3% post-survey, and 41.1% follow-up survey. Post-surveys indicated improvement in self-reported ability in all domains: understanding one's contributions to interprofessional teams (3.9 to 4.4, p < .0001), understanding other team members' contributions (3.9 to 4.4, p < .0001), learning from interprofessional team members (4.2 to 4.6, p = .0002), accounting for interprofessional perspectives (4.2 to 4.6, p < .0001), and co-developing effective care plans (3.9 to 4.4, p < .0001). Follow-up surveys rated clinical experiences as slightly-to-moderately useful (2.3 ± 1.0) and paging curriculum very-to-extremely useful (4.3 ± 1.0). This study demonstrates the value of interprofessional education for advanced students.