Search

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) continues to present a challenge to international healthcare systems and structures of public health. The focus on optimizing antibiotic prescribing in human populations has challenged healthcare systems charged with making responsible their physician-prescribers. In the United States, physicians in almost every specialty and role use antibiotics as part of their therapeutic armamentariums. In United States hospitals, most patients are administered antibiotics during their stay. Therefore, antibiotic prescribing and utilization is a commonly accepted part of medical practice. In this paper, we utilize social science work on antibiotic prescribing to examine a critical space of care in United States hospital settings. From March to August 2018, we used ethnographic methods to study hospital-based medical intensive care unit physicians at the offices and hospital floors they frequent in two urban United States teaching hospitals. We focused on eliciting the interactions and discussions surrounding antibiotic decision-making that are uniquely influenced by the context of medical intensive care units. We argue that antibiotic use in the medical intensive care units under study was shaped by urgency, hierarchy, and uncertainty representative of the medical intensive care unit's role within the larger hospital system. We conclude that by studying the culture of antibiotic prescribing in medical intensive care units, we can see more clearly both the vulnerability of the looming antimicrobial resistance crisis and by contrast the perceived insignificance of stewarding antibiotic use when considered alongside the fragility of life amidst acute medical concerns regularly experienced in the unit. • Antibiotic prescribing in the intensive care unit was shaped by existing workflows. • The pressure to treat patients in an urgent manner led to increased antibiotic use. • Felt urgency combined with complicated patient cases fostered uncertainty. • Participants recognized an interconnectedness with other teams working in the unit. • Participants used timeliness as a rationale for antibiotic prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of conceptual frameworks have emerged with the goal of helping clinicians understand and navigate the intersections of the health system and broader political, economic, and cultural processes when they care for patients. In this study, we analyze the impact that one emerging framework, "structural competency," had on medical students' and physicians' understanding of societal problems affecting patient health and the practices of health systems. In this sub-analysis of a longitudinal qualitative study conducted between August and December 2020, we analyzed 19 semi-structured interviews with 7 first-year medical students, 7 upper-level medical students, and 5 physician course facilitators who participated in a course called Introduction to Medicine and Society at an medical school in the United States affiliated with a large urban academic medical center. This paper focuses on three main findings: how medical students and faculty describe "structures" and their effects on patients and patient care; how they use or imagine using structural competency to improve patient-physician communication and work interprofessionally to address social needs; and the emotional and personal reactions that confronting societal challenges provokes. We conclude that structural competency enhances existing efforts to improve patient-physician communication and to address patients' social needs. However, we highlight how structural competency efforts might fall short of their goal to shift physicians' perspectives "upstream" to the determinants of health due to both critical ambiguities in the concept and inattention to the emotional and personal impacts of addressing societal problems in the clinic. These findings have practical implications for how clinicians are trained to act on societal issues from within the health system and conceptual implications for refining how existing frameworks and curricula conceive of the intersection between healthcare and broader processes. • Ambiguity of 'structure' and 'structural competency' hinders applicability. • Emphasis on 'structure' may unintentionally essentialize marginalized patients. • Trainees' affective responses are key to addressing societal factors in the clinic. • Humility and self-reflection helped trainees better address 'structure'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]