Child Advocacy in Action: If Not You, Who? If Not now, When?

Enhancing Physician Advocacy Through Collaboration With Government Relations: Report From the Health Policy Scholars Program

OBJECTIVE

To explore barriers, facilitators, and benefits of collaboration between academic pediatricians and institutional offices of government relations (OGR) to enhance policy advocacy efforts.

METHODS

The Academic Pediatric Associations' Health Policy Scholars met with the government relations team in their affiliated institutions as part of their experiential learning curriculum. Afterward, they submitted written reflections, which were coded and analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis to identify key themes.

RESULTS

Reflections were completed by 21 of 23 (91.3%) participants. Most participants (76.2%) were faculty at free-standing children's hospitals and had been at their institutions <5 years (52.3%) or 5 to 10 years (33.3%). Institutional OGR structure varied widely and not all institutions had well-defined priorities. Key themes of the reflections included that OGRs often had dynamic priorities and fiscal considerations frequently took precedence. Barriers to physician involvement with OGR are often related to difficulty identifying the correct staff contact and not having the time and support for advocacy work. Facilitators included leveraging existing relationships and collaborations, including those of peer or mentor connections to the OGR staff. Anticipated benefits to both OGR and physicians included improved knowledge of advocacy opportunities, enhanced advocacy efforts leveraging physicians' expertise and patient stories, and message alignment and amplification of physician and institutional advocacy work.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration between physician-advocates and institutional OGR is feasible and, with orientation and mentorship, may facilitate improved physician and institutional policy advocacy efforts. Supporting this type of collaboration may enhance physician and institutional advocacy on behalf of their shared patients and communities.

A Qualitative Study of Resident Advocacy Work

BACKGROUND

Advocacy is a critical component of pediatric training and practice. Pediatric resident advocacy experiences include skill development and real-world projects, but little is known about how pediatric residents participate in advocacy. Without this knowledge, educators run the risk of underpreparing residents for the full scope of advocacy work. This study sought to investigate how residents participate in advocacy by characterizing their projects using an evidence-informed conceptual framework and describing the unique lessons were learned by the residents.

METHODS

The authors used principles of thematic analysis to interrogate existing documents derived from pediatric residents from 2013 to 2021 at 1 institution. They purposefully sampled and deidentified project proposals and written reflections. Using a constant comparative method, they created codes. Codes, connections between codes, and findings were refined by discussion.

RESULTS

Residents demonstrated 4 different types of advocacy: some residents participated in directed agency or activism and others focused on shared agency or activism. Residents reflected on different learning experiences; residents who participated in shared forms of advocacy learned skills such as "Partnering," "Evaluating," and "Planning." Residents who were involved in directed forms of advocacy shared lessons on "Leading," "Presenting," and "Intervening." Advocacy work also changed over time: in later projects (2016-2021) residents took ownership of the role of "advocate"; social and political climate was salient in reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric residents advocate through shared activism and agency and directed activism and agency. Educators should recognize, support, and supplement the experiences of residents as they participate in different types of advocacy.