Integrating population health into a general surgical residency curriculum

Health Disparities Curricula in General Surgery Residency Programs: A Critical Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

In 2021, the structural determinants of health (SDOH) were added to the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education common program requirements for all accredited residency programs, including general surgery. In this study, we sought to explore the current scope of, and concepts used in, health disparities curricula for general surgery residents, specifically investigating how general surgery residents learn about health disparities and the SDOH.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Education Research Complete (EBSCOhost), and Web of Science Core Collection using keywords related to health disparities and the SDOH. Inclusion criteria consisted of all studies published after 2005 that discussed health disparities curricula for Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education-accredited general surgery residency programs. Five thousand three hundred seventeen articles were screened using a two-phase process. Data extraction and analysis was performed using critical review methods.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were identified. Within these articles, seven unique health disparities curricula were found. All seven of the identified curricula employed cultural frameworks as methods to mitigate health disparities. Three curricula, all published after 2011, included education on the SDOH. A wide variety of educational methods were utilized; in-person didactics was the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current literature, culture continues to play a large role in health disparities training for general surgery residents. Though further efforts are needed to understand the methods used in programs that have not published scholarly work, it is imperative to ensure that residents are provided with the sociopolitical perspective needed to understand the SDOH and serve all patients, including those affected by health disparities.

Citizenship and Social Responsibility in Surgery: A Review

Importance

Social determinants of health have been shown to be key drivers of disparities in access to surgical care and surgical outcomes. Though the concept of social responsibility has received growing attention in the medical field, little has been published contextualizing social responsibility in surgery. In this narrative review, we define social responsibility as it relates to surgery, explore the duty of surgeons to society, and provide examples of social factors associated with adverse surgical outcomes and how they can be mitigated.

Observations

The concept of social responsibility in surgery has deep roots in medical codes of ethics and evolved alongside changing views on human rights and the role of social factors in disease. The ethical duty of surgeons to society is based on the ethical principles of benevolence and justice and is grounded within the framework of the social contract. Surgeons have a responsibility to understand how factors such as patient demographics, the social environment, clinician awareness, and the health care system are associated with inequitable patient outcomes. Through education, we can empower surgeons to advocate for their patients, address the causes and consequences of surgical disparities, and incorporate social responsibility into their daily practice.

Conclusions and Relevance

One of the greatest challenges in the field of surgery is ensuring that surgical care is provided in an equitable and sustainable way. Surgeons have a duty to understand the factors that lead to health care disparities and use their knowledge, skills, and privileged position to address these issues at the individual and societal level.

Cultural Competency Curricula in US Graduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Cultural competency training provides participants with knowledge and skills to improve cross-cultural communication and is required for all graduate medical education (GME) training programs.

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to determine what cultural competency curricula exist specifically in GME.

METHODS

In April 2020, the authors performed a scoping review of the literature using a multidatabase (PubMed, Ovid, MedEdPORTAL) search strategy that included keywords relevant to GME and cultural competency. The authors extracted descriptive data about the structure, implementation, and analysis of cultural competency curricula and analyzed these data for trends.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven articles met criteria for inclusion, of which 61 (91%) were focused exclusively on residents. The most commonly included specialties were psychiatry (n=19, 28.4%), internal medicine (n=16, 23.9%), and pediatrics (n=15, 22.4%). The shortest intervention was a 30-minute online module, while the longest contained didactics, electives, and mentoring programs that spanned the entirety of residency training (4 years). The sample sizes of included studies ranged from 6 to 833 participants. Eight (11.9%) studies utilized OSCEs as assessment tools, while 17 (25.4%) conducted semi-structured interviews or focus groups. Four common themes were unique interventions, retention of learning, trainee evaluation of curricula, and resources required for implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation exists in the design, implementation, and evaluation of cultural competency curricula for residents and fellows.

Comparative analysis: potential barriers to career participation by north american physicians in global health

Physician interest in global health, particularly among family physicians, is reflected by an increasing proliferation of field training and service experiences. However, translating initial training involvement into a defined and sustainable global health career remains difficult and beset by numerous barriers. Existing global health literature has largely examined training experiences and related ethical considerations while neglecting the role of career development in global health. To explore this, this paper extrapolates potential barriers to global health career involvement from existing literature and compares these to salary and skills requirements for archetypal physician positions in global health, presenting a framework of possible barriers to sustained physician participation in global health work. Notable barriers identified include financial limitations, scheduling conflicts, security/family concerns, skills limitations, limited awareness of opportunities, and specialty choice, with family practice often closely aligned with global health experience. Proposed solutions include financial support, protected time, family relocation support, and additional training. This framework delineates barriers to career involvement in global health by physicians. Further research regarding these barriers as well as potential solutions may help direct policy and initiatives to better utilize physicians, particularly family physicians, as a valuable global health human resource.