Search

Objectives Management reasoning has not been widely explored but likely requires broader abilities than diagnostic reasoning. An enhanced understanding of management reasoning could improve medical education and patient care. We conducted a novel exploratory study to gain further insights into procedure-based management reasoning. Methods Participant physicians managed a simulated patient who acutely decompensates in a team-based, time-pressured, live scenario. Immediately following the scenario, physicians perform a think-aloud protocol by watching video recordings of their performance and narrating their reflections in real-time. Verbatim transcripts of the think-aloud protocol were inductively coded using a constant comparative method and evaluated for themes. Results We recruited 19 physicians (15 internal medicine, one family medicine, and three general surgery) for this study. Recognizing that diagnostic and management reasoning intertwine, this paper focuses on management reasoning’s characteristics. We developed three categories of management reasoning factors with eight subthemes. These are Patient factors: Acuity and Preferences; Physician factors: Recognized Errors, Anxiety, Metacognition, Monitoring, and Threshold to Treat; and one Environment factor: Resources. Conclusions Our findings on procedure-based management reasoning are consistent with Situation Awareness and Situated Cognition models and the extant work on management reasoning, demonstrating that management is inherently complex and contextually bound. Unique to this study, all physicians focused on prognosis, indicating that attaining competency in procedural management may require planning and prediction abilities. Physicians also expressed concerns about making mistakes, potentially resulting from the scenario’s emphasis on a procedure and our physicians’ having less expertise in the treatment of tension pneumothorax.

Background Since the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) introduced the Milestones in 2013, the body of validity evidence supporting their use has grown, but there is a gap with regard to response process. Objective The purpose of this study is to qualitatively explore validity evidence pertaining to the response process of individual Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) members when assigning Milestone ratings to a resident. Methods Using a constructivist paradigm, we conducted a thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 8 Transitional Year (TY) CCC members from 4 programs immediately following a CCC meeting between November and December 2020. Participants were queried about their response process in their application of Milestone assessment. Analysis was iterative, including coding, constant comparison, and theming. Results Participant interviews identified an absence of formal training and a perception that Milestones are a tool for resident assessment without recognizing their role in program evaluation. In describing their thought process, participants reported comparing averaged assessment data to peers and time in training to generate Milestone ratings. Meaningful narrative comments, when available, differentiated resident performance from peers. When assessment data were absent, participants assumed an average performance. Conclusions Our study found that the response process used by TY CCC members was not always consistent with the dual purpose of the Milestones to improve educational outcomes at the levels of residents and the program.

Introduction Trainees (e.g., residents) are an obvious and common source of feedback for faculty; however, gaps exist in our understanding of their experiences and practices of providing such feedback. To gain a deeper understanding, this study examined residents’ beliefs about what feedback is important to provide, the kinds of feedback they report giving, and the feedback they actually gave. Materials and Methods Descriptive statistics were used to analyze residents’ perceptions and feedback behaviors (n = 42/96). Thematic analysis was used to analyze end-of-rotation faculty assessments from 2018 to 2019 (n = 559) to explore the actual written feedback residents provided to the faculty. Results The findings suggest that residents experience workload constraints (e.g., too many feedback requests), feel that their feedback is not valuable or relevant, and place conditions on when and what feedback is given (e.g., faculty agreeableness, prefer giving positively oriented feedback, and uncomfortable giving negative feedback). When comparing what feedback residents rated as important with the kinds of feedback they reported giving and actually gave, the findings also suggest that there were consistencies (e.g., clinical instruction and professionalism) and inconsistencies (e.g., evidence-based practice and medical knowledge) that may limit constructive feedback for faculty. Conclusions Taken together, the findings suggest that trainee assessments of faculty may be insufficient as a primary source of feedback to support the improvement of faculty performance. Potential solutions are discussed.

Background Situated cognition theory argues that thinking is inextricably situated in a context. In clinical reasoning, this can lead to context specificity: a physician arriving at two different diagnoses for two patients with the same symptoms, findings, and diagnosis but different contextual factors (something beyond case content potentially influencing reasoning). This paper experimentally investigates the presence of and mechanisms behind context specificity by measuring differences in clinical reasoning performance in cases with and without contextual factors. Methods An experimental study was conducted in 2018–2019 with 39 resident and attending physicians in internal medicine. Participants viewed two outpatient clinic video cases (unstable angina and diabetes mellitus), one with distracting contextual factors and one without. After viewing each case, participants responded to six open-ended diagnostic items (e.g. problem list, leading diagnosis) and rated their cognitive load. Results Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) results revealed significant differences in angina case performance with and without contextual factors [Pillai’s trace = 0.72, F = 12.4, df =(6, 29), p 0.001, η p 2 = 0.72 $\eta _{\rm p}^2 = 0.72$ ], with follow-up univariate analyses indicating that participants performed statistically significantly worse in cases with contextual factors on five of six items. There were no significant differences in diabetes cases between conditions. There was no statistically significant difference in cognitive load between conditions. Conclusions Using typical presentations of common diagnoses, and contextual factors typical for clinical practice, we provide ecologically valid evidence for the theoretically predicted negative effects of context specificity (i.e. for the angina case), with large effect sizes, offering insight into the persistence of diagnostic error.

Background The literature suggests that affect, higher-level cognitive processes (e.g. decision-making), and agency (the capacity to produce an effect) are important for reasoning; however, we do not know how these factors respond to context. Using situated cognition theory as a framework, and linguistic tools as a method, we explored the effects of context specificity [a physician seeing two patients with identical presentations (symptoms and findings), but coming to two different diagnoses], hypothesizing more linguistic markers of cognitive load in the presence of contextual factors (e.g. incorrect diagnostic suggestion). Methods In this comparative and exploratory study, 64 physicians each completed one case with contextual factors and one without. Transcribed think-aloud reflections were coded by Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software for markers of affect, cognitive processes, and first-person pronouns. A repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance was used to inferentially compare these LIWC categories between cases with and without contextual factors. This was followed by exploratory descriptive analysis of subcategories. Results As hypothesized, participants used more affective and cognitive process markers in cases with contextual factors and more I/me pronouns in cases without. These differences were statistically significant for cognitive processing words but not affective and pronominal words. Exploratory analysis revealed more negative emotions, cognitive processes of insight, and third-person pronouns in cases with contextual factors. Conclusions This study exposes linguistic differences arising from context specificity. These results demonstrate the value of a situated cognition view of patient encounters and reveal the utility of linguistic tools for examining clinical reasoning.

Introduction Contextual factors (eg, diagnostic suggestion and burnout) can affect physician clinical reasoning performance, leading to diagnostic error. Yet, contextual factors have only recently been studied and none of that work focused on how physicians appraise (ie, evaluate) the clinical situation as they reason. The purpose of this qualitative study was to use appraisal to describe the effect of contextual factors on clinical reasoning. Materials and Methods Physicians (n = 25) either viewed two video cases or participated in two live scenarios, one with contextual factors and one without. Afterwards, they completed a “think-aloud” reflection while reviewing the cases. Transcribed think-alouds were coded for appraisal markers, comparing cases with and without contextual factors. Results When contextual factors were present, participants expressed more emotional evaluation and uncertainty about those emotions. Across all types of cases, participants expressed uncertainty about the case and assessed what “could” or “would” have gone differently. Conclusions This study suggests that one major effect of contextual factors may be that they induce emotions, which may affect the process of clinical reasoning and diagnostic error. It also suggests that uncertainty may be common in clinical practice, and we should thus further explore its impact.

At a time when cognitive and behavioral theories dominated the landscape of learning theories, Lave and Wenger's situated learning theory (SLT) opened new territory by illuminating social and cultural learning processes. Many researchers and educators in the health professions embraced this theory, but few have considered how SLT has been used and what has been learned or improved through its use in health professions education (HPE). In this scoping review, the authors examine these questions and consider opportunities for future work with SLT in HPE. The authors followed Levac's modified scoping review framework. They conducted a search of CINAHL, ERIC, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles referencing SLT or related concepts in HPE between 2006 and 2016. Two reviewers screened all titles and abstracts, then screened full text for inclusion based on substantive treatment of SLT. Two authors extracted, analyzed and synthesized data from the final set of 193 articles. The authors identified two patterns of theory use. One sought an understanding of social learning processes in a specific context. The other aimed to design and/or evaluate interventions associated with communities of practice. These patterns are similar to other literatures (e.g., general education, healthcare, and organizational development) and, according to Lave and Wenger, may reflect confusion about the purpose, stance, and terminology of SLT. The authors discuss their findings in relation to primary source literature and consider opportunities for HPE researchers to employ and contribute to SLT going forward.

Objective This retrospective study compares differences in clinical performance on the psychiatry clerkship Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) between students receiving traditional repeated clinical simulation with those receiving repeated clinical simulation using the Kolb Cycle. Methods Psychiatry clerkship OSCE scores from 321 students who completed their psychiatry clerkship in 2016 and 2017 were compared. Specific performance measures included communication skills as determined by the Essential Elements of Communication, gathering a history, documenting a history and mental status exam, defending a differential diagnosis, and proposing a treatment plan. Results were calculated using repeated two-way analysis of variance between students receiving no simulation and traditional repeated simulation training (TRS) as compared to students receiving no simulation and repeated simulation utilizing the Kolb cycle (KRS). Results Students who received KRS performed significantly better in three of the five components of the clerkship OSCE as compared to students who received TRS. Specifically, students who received KRS performed better on gathering a history (+ 14.1%, p < 0.001), documenting a history (+ 13.4%, p < 0.001), and developing a treatment plan (+ 16.7%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in communication skills or in developing and defending a differential diagnosis. Conclusions Psychiatry clerkship students engaged in repeated simulations explicitly integrated with the Kolb cycle demonstrate improved clinical skills as measured by OSCE performance. Integration of the Kolb cycle in designing simulation experiences should be carefully considered and may serve as a model for individualized coaching in programs of assessment.

ObjectivesDiagnostic error is a growing concern in U.S. healthcare. There is mounting evidence that errors may not always be due to knowledge gaps, but also tocontext specificity: a physician seeing two identical patient presentations from a content perspective (e.g., history, labs) yet arriving at two distinct diagnoses. This study used the lens of situated cognition theory – which views clinical reasoning as interconnected with surrounding contextual factors – to design and test an instructional module to mitigate the negative effects of context specificity. We hypothesized that experimental participants would perform better on the outcome measure than those in the control group.MethodsThis study divided 39 resident and attending physicians into an experimental group receiving an interactive computer training and “think-aloud” exercise and a control group, comparing their clinical reasoning. Clinical reasoning performance in a simulated unstable angina case with contextual factors (i.e., diagnostic suggestion) was determined using performance on a post-encounter form (PEF) as the outcome measure. The participants who received the training and did the reflection were compared to those who did not using descriptive statistics and a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA).ResultsDescriptive statistics suggested slightly better performance for the experimental group, but MANCOVA results revealed no statistically significant differences (Pillai’s Trace=0.20, F=1.9,df=[4, 29], p=0.15).ConclusionsWhile differences were not statistically significant, this study suggests the potential utility of strategies that provide education and awareness of contextual factors and space for reflective practice.

Objectives Uncertainty is common in clinical reasoning given the dynamic processes required to come to a diagnosis. Though some uncertainty is expected during clinical encounters, it can have detrimental effects on clinical reasoning. Likewise, evidence has established the potentially detrimental effects of the presence of distracting contextual factors (i.e., factors other than case content needed to establish a diagnosis) in a clinical encounter on clinical reasoning. The purpose of this study was to examine how linguistic markers of uncertainty overlap with different clinical reasoning tasks and how distracting contextual factors might affect physicians’ clinical reasoning process. Methods In this descriptive exploratory study, physicians participated in a live or video recorded simulated clinical encounter depicting a patient with unstable angina with and without contextual factors. Transcribed think-aloud reflections were coded using Goldszmidt’s clinical reasoning task typology (26 tasks encompassing the domains of framing, diagnosis, management, and reflection) and then those coded categories were examined using linguistic markers of uncertainty (e.g., probably, possibly, etc.). Results Thirty physicians with varying levels of experience participated. Consistent with expectations, descriptive analysis revealed that physicians expressed more uncertainty in cases with distracting contextual factors compared to those without. Across the four domains of reasoning tasks, physicians expressed the most uncertainty in diagnosis and least in reflection. Conclusions These results highlight how linguistic markers of uncertainty can shed light on the role contextual factors might play in uncertainty which can lead to error and why it is essential to find ways of managing it.

This article presents reflections of career pathways of simulation researchers as well as a discussion of the themes found in the stories presented. It is the intent of the authors to present and foster a discussion around the ways in which we as a simulation community wish to promote recognition of scholarship among simulation researchers and help support newcomers find success as simulation researchers in academia. We also present recommendations for those considering entering the field based on tactics that were successful and not successful among the scholars who shared their stories. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to examine Uniformed Services University (USU) women graduates in terms of percent of graduates', specialty choices and practice choices as compared to civilian women who graduate and practice medicine in the USA. This is a perspective that is currently not well understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all USU women graduates (1980-2015) using the 2016 American Medical Association (AMA) Physician Masterfile that included data from the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). To describe USU women graduates' current practice status we queried for: (1) medical school; (2) year of graduation; (3) practice state; (4) primary specialty board; and (5) major professional activity (office-based practice vs. full-time hospital staff). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS Our findings indicate that the percentage of USU women graduates has increased over time and stands at 29% for the 2010-2015 cohort as compared to 48% for women graduating from all U.S. medical schools. USU women graduates have a slightly higher board certification rate (89%) than the national cohort (88%). USU women graduates also have a higher percentage in family medicine (19%) than the national cohort (14%). USU women graduates practice in 48 states and were equally split between full-time hospital staff and office-based practice which differs from the national cohort that has a much higher proportion in office-based practice (85%). CONCLUSIONS Women are making significant gains in enrollment at USU, obtaining board certification at similar, and in some cases, higher rates than their civilian peers, and practicing in diverse specialties. This study provides a descriptive picture of women's enrollment and practice characteristics from a military-based medical school. Future work could examine underlying factors that may influence their school choice, career experiences, and trajectories. Future research could also focus on women's experiences of mentoring and support to better understand these factors.

Cognitive load is a key mediator of cognitive processing that may impact clinical reasoning performance. The purpose of this study was to gather biologic validity evidence for correlates of different types of self-reported cognitive load, and to explore the association of self-reported cognitive load and physiologic measures with clinical reasoning performance. We hypothesized that increased cognitive load would manifest evidence of elevated sympathetic tone and would be associated with lower clinical reasoning performance scores. Fifteen medical students wore Holter monitors and watched three videos depicting medical encounters before completing a post-encounter form and standard measures of cognitive load. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between cardiac measures (mean heart rate, heart rate variability and QT interval variability) and self-reported measures of cognitive load, and their association with clinical reasoning performance scores. Despite the low number of participants, strong positive correlations were found between measures of intrinsic cognitive load and heart rate variability. Performance was negatively correlated with mean heart rate, as well as single-item cognitive load measures. Our data signify a possible role for using physiologic monitoring for identifying individuals experiencing high cognitive load and those at risk for performing poorly during clinical reasoning tasks.

Introduction There is a need for educational resources supporting the practice and assessment of the complex processes of clinical reasoning in the inpatient setting along a continuum of physician experience levels. Methods Using participatory design, we created a scenario-based simulation integrating diagnostic ambiguity, contextual factors, and rising patient acuity to increase complexity. Resources include an open-ended written exercise and think-aloud reflection protocol to elicit diagnostic and management reasoning and reflection on that reasoning. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the initial implementation evaluation results. Results Twenty physicians from multiple training stages and specialties (interns, residents, attendings, family physicians, internists, surgeons) underwent the simulated scenario. Participants engaged in clinical reasoning processes consistent with the design, considering a total of 19 differential diagnoses. Ten participants provided the correct leading diagnosis, tension pneumothorax, with an additional eight providing pneumothorax and all participants offering relevant supporting evidence. There was also good evidence of management reasoning, with all participants either performing an intervention or calling for assistance and reflecting on management plans in the think-aloud. The scenario was a reasonable approximation of clinical practice, with a mean authenticity rating of 4.15 out of 5. Finally, the scenario presented adequate challenge, with interns and residents rating it as only slightly more challenging (means of 7.83 and 7.17, respectively) than attendings (mean of 6.63 out of 10). Discussion Despite the challenges of scenario complexity, evaluation results indicate that this resource supports the observation and analysis of diagnostic and management reasoning of diverse specialties from interns through attendings.

Introduction Gender disparity in medicine has drawn increased attention in the form of root cause analysis and programmatic solutions with the goal of equity. Research indicates that mentoring, guidance, and support, which include the provision of social and academic guidance and support from more experienced practitioners, can mitigate challenges associated with gender disparity. The purpose of this study was to explore women medical students’ self-reports of mentorship during their time at Uniformed Services University (USU), if women report similar levels of mentorship as compared to men, and if levels of characteristics associated with mentoring (eg, social support, academic guidance) changed over time. Materials and Method Using data from the American Association of Medical College’s Graduate Questionnaire, a survey sent to all medical students prior to graduation, items were coded as related to mentorship, guidance, and support and analyzed to compare responses of female and male students from graduating USU classes of 2010–2017. Results No significant difference was found between experiences of female and male survey respondents. Equitable experiences were consistent across time for the 8 years of the study. Conclusions Although mentorship is cited as a key factor in mediating gender disparity in medicine, other STEM fields, and the military, the findings suggest that there is equity at the USU undergraduate medical education level. Further studies are needed to understand if disparities in mentorship experiences occur at other stages of a military physician’s career, such as graduate medical education, faculty and academic promotion levels.

Context Language is one of the primary modalities for teaching and learning in the health professions in contexts ranging from the more formal teaching relationships of medical school to the guided practice of trainees through continuing education and the deliberate practice of lifelong learning. Yet linguistic analysis, with the possible exception of discourse analysis, has not become a core methodological tool in the field of health professions education (HPE). The purpose of this paper is to argue for the more widespread adoption of one particular approach to linguistics, one that examines less of what learners and instructors say and looks more at how they say it: functional linguistics. Functional linguistics THE POWER OF 'STEALTH WORDS': This approach theorises and structures the functions of language, regularly focusing attention on 'stealth words' such as I, but and was. Drawing on a rich body of literature in linguistics, psychology, the learning sciences and some early work in HPE, we demonstrate how functional linguistic tools can be applied to better understand learners' and instructors' beliefs, reasoning processes, values and emotions. Functional linguistics and reflection AN APPLICATION OF STEALTH WORDS: A brief qualitative analysis of one tool - analysis of the generic use of 'you' to mean 'one' or 'anyone' - demonstrates how functional linguistics can offer insight into physicians' bids for credibility and alignment as they think aloud about their clinical reasoning. Functional linguistics and hpe FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Finally, we offer suggestions for how functional linguistic tools might address questions and gaps in four active research areas in HPE: reflection; emotion and reasoning; learning in simulated contexts, and self-regulated learning. Conclusions We argue that the words used by learners, instructors and practitioners in the health professions as they move through undergraduate and graduate training into practice can offer clues that will help researchers, instructors and colleagues to better support them.

This chapter provides readers with an introduction to some of the diverse data sources available to simulation researchers. This chapter compliments previous chapters (e.g., Chap. 4, Starting your Research Project) by drawing on research examples to highlight data generated from healthcare simulation-based encounters that may help the reader determine which data forms will best answer their research questions. In keeping with the goals of this text and the diversity of simulation in healthcare, the chapter also draws on examples from a variety of health professions domains, including nursing, medicine, and allied health, while highlighting a variety of simulation modalities, such as live simulations and augmented reality. The chapter ends with advice and suggestions as well as pointers to other complementary chapters in this book.

In this chapter, we outline a working definition of what a program of research is and describe some of the key components necessary for pursuing a program of research. We next highlight select programs of research within healthcare simulation, highlighting differing ways in which a program of research may arise (e.g., personal or organizational interests, research collaborations) and how programs grow and change as they mature. In keeping with the goals of this text, this chapter is primarily intended for individuals who are newly engaging in or are considering developing a program of research in healthcare simulation.

In this chapter, we define program evaluation, address its role in evaluating surgical education programs, describe important early steps surgical program evaluators can take to improve the usefulness of program evaluation, discuss common challenges, and offer solutions evaluators can use to overcome these challenges. The chapter is intended for those who are engaging or considering engaging in program evaluation for the first time or are doing so with limited support from a formal program evaluator. Additionally, we have included resources and examples to provide guidance beyond the scope of this chapter.

Introduction We describe the development and implementation of tools medical educators or researchers can use for developing or analyzing residents' through attending physicians' clinical reasoning in an outpatient clinic setting. The resource includes two scenario-based simulations (i.e., diabetes, angina), implementation support materials, an open-ended postencounter form, and a think-aloud reflection protocol. Method We designed two scenarios with potential case ambiguity and contextual factors to add complexity for studying clinical reasoning. The scenarios are designed to be used prior to an open-ended written exercise and a think-aloud reflection to elicit reasoning and reflection. We report on their implementation in a research context but developed them to be used in both educational and research settings. Results Twelve physicians (five interns, three residents, and four attendings) considered between three and six differential diagnoses (M = 4.0) for the diabetes scenario and between three and nine differentials (M = 4.3) for angina. In think-aloud reflections, participants reconsidered their thinking between zero and 14 times (M = 3.5) for diabetes and zero and 11 times (M = 3.3) for angina. Cognitive load scores ranged from 4 to 8 (out of 10; M = 6.2) for diabetes and 5 to 8 (M = 6.6) for angina. Participants rated scenario authenticity between 4 and 5 (out of 5). Discussion The potential case content ambiguity, along with the contextual factors (e.g., patient suggesting alternative diagnoses), provides a complex environment in which to explore or teach clinical reasoning.

Using an embedded, single-case study, this paper explores learning opportunities in a worksite healthcare services firm and how the business impact of employee learning is measured. We applied grounded theory analytical procedures, with an eye to developing a theoretical model of the impact measurement process. The resulting model illustrates how practical issues created a fixed focus on clinical and regulatory requirements, inhibiting consensus about what constitutes learning impact measurement and the extent to which non-technical learning is valued in identifying employees for development and advancement. Lastly, we discuss implications for decision-makers in similar organizations.

Objectives/Hypothesis: Incoming otolaryngology residents are expected to triage and manage airway, bleeding, and other emergencies with little prior experience. Simulation-based education has become increasingly important as it provides tools to develop psychomotor skills and judgment early in residency, using realistic experiences while eliminating patient risk. We hypothesize that a Boot Camp course emphasizing basic otolaryngology management will increase participants' confidence and be perceived as useful in developing their knowledge, technical skills, self-confidence, and improving clinical performance, both immediately and 6 months following the course. Study Design: Survey. Methods: A 1-day Boot Camp was developed consisting of six technical skills stations (mask ventilation, intubation, flexible laryngoscopy, microlaryngoscopy/bronchoscopy, epistaxis control, and cricothyroidotomy); a session involving telephone inquiry triage, and two complex airway scenarios addressing medical management and emphasizing team leadership. Residents completed questionnaires before, immediately, and 6 months following course completion. Results: Thirty residents enrolled, 27 participated in the course, and 24 completed all three surveys. Previous experiences and confidence levels were variable; 26 of 30 (87%) identified emergency airway management as a concern before attending the course. A Fisher's exact test demonstrated improved confidence (P < .05) for every skill. An overwhelming majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed the intervention was useful in developing their knowledge, technical skills, self-confidence, and improving clinical performance. Conclusions: An intensive, simulation-based Boot Camp addressing airway, bleeding, and other otolaryngology emergencies was successful in improving junior otolaryngology residents' confidence and was perceived as useful in developing knowledge, technical skills, self-confidence, and improving clinical performance.

We report a case of using simulation to aid in the performance of ex utero intrapartum treatment (EXIT) procedure to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A primigravid with a fetus who was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome was scheduled for an EXIT to ECMO procedure to be done by members of her obstetrical and neonatal teams. It would be the first time any of the members of the 2 teams would work together. Simulation was used to allow all involved parties to experience the procedure before the live operation. In addition, the simulation enabled the interdisciplinary teams to work with each other, identify possible complications, and further plan the coordination during the event. The EXIT to ECMO surgery was completed successfully. The use of low-fidelity, cost-effective simulation during a surgical rehearsal can give a surgical team critical advantage when performing a rare and/or complex procedure.

Background : Women represent 15% of practicing general surgeons. Gender-based discrimination has been implicated as discouraging women from surgery. We sought to determine women’s perceptions of gender-based discrimination in the surgical training and working environment. Methods : Following IRB approval, we fielded a pilot survey measuring perceptions and impact of gender-based discrimination in medical school, residency training, and surgical practice. It was sent electronically to 1,065 individual members of the Association of Women Surgeons. Results : We received 334 responses from medical students, residents, and practicing physicians with a response rate of 31%. Eighty-seven percent experienced gender-based discrimination in medical school, 88% in residency, and 91% in practice. Perceived sources of gender-based discrimination included superiors, physician peers, clinical support staff, and patients, with 40% emanating from women and 60% from men. Conclusions : The majority of responses indicated perceived gender-based discrimination during medical school, residency, and practice. Gender-based discrimination comes from both sexes and has a significant impact on women surgeons. Keywords: gender discrimination; women; sexual harassment; surgery; work discrimination; women in medicine (Published: 3 February 2015) Citation: Med Educ Online 2015, 20: 25923 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/meo.v20.25923