Search

Residency training is associated with stress and burnout that can contribute to poor mental health, yet many residents do not get the help needed. While some healthcare institutions provide mental health services specifically for residents, literature has documented few examples. The objective of this study was to investigate the utilization and patient characteristics of a resident mental health program. The authors conducted a retrospective records analysis of residents who utilized outpatient mental health services through the Thomas Jefferson University Hospital Emotional Health and Wellness Program for House Staff from 2010 to 2018. A total of 158 resident patient charts were reviewed. Utilization was highest for females, first years, and general internal medicine residents. Initial help-seeking was most common for summer, winter, and intern year. The most frequent diagnoses were adjustment, depressive, and anxiety disorders. Of residents who completed screening tools, 43% screened positive for moderate to severe depression, 11% screened positive for hazardous alcohol consumption, and 15% endorsed thoughts of death or suicide. Resident physicians manifest psychiatric symptoms, mental disorders, and suicidal ideation that require treatment and intervention. Yet, a minority of residents make use of services. This data emphasizes the need to promote help-seeking behaviors among residents and ensure timely access to comprehensive mental health services.

Transthoracic echocardiography is the standard of care in anatomic and functional cardiovascular assessment; however, focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) performed with portable ultrasound equipment is increasingly being used as an adjunct to comprehensive history and physical examination. FoCUS assessments, unlike formal echocardiography, are intended to assist physicians in answering explicit clinical questions with a narrow differential diagnosis in real time. Over the past decade, a growing body of literature has repeatedly shown the value that FoCUS adds to clinical evaluation. Specifically, FoCUS improves point-of-care diagnostic accuracy, which in turn modifies treatment plans, decreases time to diagnosis, and reduces resource utilization. Although less robust, there is also evidence showing improvement in clinical outcomes. Based on this evidence, clinicians, training programs, and clinical societies have embraced FoCUS as a tool to complement bedside patient evaluation. Herein, we review the evidence for FoCUS in clinical practice, specifically evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, the impact on clinical decision-making, and the effect on clinical outcomes.

Medical errors harm patients and increase costs. Engaging early clinicians in patient safety (PS) is critical but challenging. We evaluated the impact of a Patient Safety Escape Room (PSER) simulation on intern engagement in PS. During the PSER, learner teams identified PS hazards in a simulated hospital room, revealing clues that allow "escape" via event report entry. One-hundred twenty interns from 14 training programs completed 2 PSERs each. Before the PSER, 5% reported experience entering an event report. Following the PSER, all interns had participated in entering an event report. Mean learner-reported comfort in identifying PS hazards improved significantly (6.3 ± 1.57 to 8.0 ± 1.2; P0.001). Individual safety hazards were identified by between 6% and 100% of teams. Mean observer-rated teamwork was lower than learner-rated teamwork (41.5 ± 5.18 versus 45.92 ± 3.87; P = 0.01). Subsequent resident reporting rates did not increase compared with historic controls. The PSER engaged early learners, however, translating improvements into the clinical environment remains challenging.

PURPOSE: Medical student specialty choices have significant downstream effects on the availability of physicians and, ultimately, the effectiveness of health systems. This study investigated how medical student specialty preferences change over time in relation to their demographics and lifestyle preferences. METHOD: Students from ten medical schools were surveyed at matriculation (2012) and graduation (2016). The two surveys included questions about specialty and lifestyle preferences, demographics, educational background, and indebtedness. Student data from 2012 to 2016 were paired together and grouped into those whose specialty preferences remained constant or switched. RESULTS: Response rates in 2012 and 2016 were 65% (997/1530) and 50% (788/1575), respectively. Fourth-year students ranked “enjoying the type of work I am doing” as less important to a good physician lifestyle than did first-year students (from 59.6 to 39.7%). The lifestyle factors “having control of work schedule” and “having enough time off work” were ranked as more important to fourth-year students than first-year students (from 15.6 to 18.2% and 14.8 to 31.9%, respectively). The paired dataset included 19% of eligible students (237/1226). Demographic and lifestyle factors were not significantly associated with specialty preference switching. Additionally, no significant association existed between changing lifestyle preferences and switching specialty preference (p = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: During the course of medical school, lifestyle preferences became more focused on day-to-day factors and less on deeper motivational factors. Neither demographics nor lifestyle preferences appear to relate to a student’s decision to switch specialty preference during medical school. These findings represent an important step in uncovering causes of specialty preference trends. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40670-019-00790-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Team-based decision-making has been shown to reduce diagnostic error, increase clinical certainty, and decrease adverse events. Objective This study aimed to assess the effect of peer discussion on resident practice intensity (PI) and clinical certainty (CC). Methods A vignette-based instrument was adapted to measure PI, defined as the likelihood of ordering additional diagnostic tests, consultations or empiric treatment, and CC. Internal medicine residents at 7 programs in the Philadelphia area from April 2018 to June 2019 were eligible for inclusion in the study. Participants formed groups and completed each item of the instrument individually and as a group with time for peer discussion in between individual and group responses. Predicted group PI and CC scores were compared with measured group PI and CC scores, respectively, using paired t testing. Results Sixty-nine groups participated in the study (response rate 34%, average group size 2.88). The measured group PI score (2.29, SD = 0.23) was significantly lower than the predicted group PI score (2.33, SD = 0.22) with a mean difference of 0.04 (SD = 0.10; 95% CI 0.02–0.07; P = .0002). The measured group CC score (0.493, SD = 0.164) was significantly higher than the predicted group CC score (0.475, SD = 0.136) with a mean difference of 0.018 (SD = 0.073; 95% CI 0.0006–0.0356; P = .022). Conclusions In this multicenter study of resident PI, peer discussion reduced PI and increased CC more than would be expected from averaging group members' individual scores.

Transthoracic echocardiography is the standard of care in anatomic and functional cardiovascular assessment; however, focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) performed with portable ultrasound equipment is increasingly being used as an adjunct to comprehensive history and physical examination. FoCUS assessments, unlike formal echocardiography, are intended to assist physicians in answering explicit clinical questions with a narrow differential diagnosis in real time. Over the past decade, a growing body of literature has repeatedly shown the value that FoCUS adds to clinical evaluation. Specifically, FoCUS improves point-of-care diagnostic accuracy, which in turn modifies treatment plans, decreases time to diagnosis, and reduces resource utilization. Although less robust, there is also evidence showing improvement in clinical outcomes. Based on this evidence, clinicians, training programs, and clinical societies have embraced FoCUS as a tool to complement bedside patient evaluation. Herein, we review the evidence for FoCUS in clinical practice, specifically evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, the impact on clinical decision-making, and the effect on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Despite increasing prevalence in emergency medicine (EM), the vice chair of education (VCE) role remains ambiguous with regard to associated responsibilities and expectations. This study aimed to identify training experiences of current VCEs, clarify responsibilities, review career paths, and gather data to inform a unified job description. METHODS: A 40‐item, anonymous survey was electronically sent to EM VCEs. VCEs were identified through EM chairs, residency program directors, and residency coordinators through solicitation e‐mails distributed through respective listservs. Quantitative data are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals and continuous variables as medians with interquartiles (IQRs). Open‐ and axial‐coding methods were used to organize qualitative data into thematic categories. RESULTS: Forty‐seven of 59 VCEs completed the survey (79.6% response rate); 74.4% were male and 89.3% were white. Average time in the role was 3.56 years (median = 3.0 years, IQR = 4.0 years), with 74.5% serving as inaugural VCE. Many respondents held at least one additional administrative title. Most had no defined job description (68.9%) and reported no defined metrics of success (88.6%). Almost 78% received a reduction in clinical duties, with an average reduction of 27.7% protected time effort (median = 27.2%, IQR = 22.5%). Responsibilities thematically link to faculty affairs and promotion of the departmental educational mission and scholarship. CONCLUSION: Given the variability in expectations observed, the authors suggest the adoption of a unified VCE job description with detailed responsibilities and performance metrics to ensure success in the role. Efforts to improve the diversity of VCEs are encouraged to better match the diversity of learners.

Background Incorporating focused cardiac ultrasonography (FoCUS) into clinical examination could improve the diagnostic yield of bedside patient evaluation. Purpose To compare the accuracy of FoCUS-assisted clinical assessment versus clinical assessment alone for diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction or valvular disease in adults having cardiovascular evaluation. Data Sources English-language searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from 1 January 1990 to 23 May 2019 and review of reference citations. Study Selection Eligible studies were done in patients having cardiovascular evaluation; compared FoCUS-assisted clinical assessment versus clinical assessment alone for the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, aortic or mitral valve disease, or pericardial effusion; and used transthoracic echocardiography as the reference standard. Data Extraction Three study investigators independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. Data Synthesis Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. The sensitivity of clinical assessment for diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction

Guidelines for continuous cardiac monitoring (CCM) have focused almost exclusively on cardiac diagnoses, thus limiting their application to a general medical population. In this study, a retrospective chart review was performed to identify the reasons that general medical patients, cared for on hospitalist-led inpatient teaching teams between April 2017 and February 2018, were initiated and maintained on CCM, and to determine the incidence of clinically significant arrhythmias in this patient population. The three most common reasons for telemetry initiation were sepsis (24%), arrhythmias (12%), and hypoxia (10%). Most patients remained on telemetry for more than 48 hours (62%) and a significant number of patients were on telemetry until they were discharged from the hospital (39%). Of the cumulative total of more than 20,573 hours of CCM provided to this patient population, 37% of patients demonstrated only normal sinus rhythm and 3% had a clinically significant arrhythmia that affected management.

Miscommunications during patient handoff can lead to harm. The I-PASS bundle has been shown to improve safety outcomes. Although effective training reliably improves verbal handoffs, research has demonstrated a lack of effect on written handoffs. The objective was to compare written handoff before and after integration of a standardized electronic health record (EHR) tool. Interns at a large urban academic medical center underwent I-PASS handoff training. The EHR handoff tool was then revised to prompt the I-PASS components. Handoff documents were obtained before and after the intervention. More handoffs included Illness Severity (33% to 59%, P < .001) and Action List (65% to 83%, P = .005) after the intervention. There was no change in handoffs with miscommunications (12.5% to 10%, P = .566) or omissions (8% to 11%, P = .447). Handoffs including tangential or unrelated information decreased (20% to 4%, P = .001). A written handoff tool can reinforce the effect of training and increase adherence to I-PASS.

Context There exists a disparity between the views of physicians and the views of their patients on end-of-life decisions. However, the timing of when the end-of-life preferences of physicians and non-medically-trained individuals diverge is currently unknown. The objective of this paper is to characterise how preferences for medical interventions change throughout medical education and residency or fellowship training when confronted with scenarios of critical or terminal illness. Methods This is a single-centre cross-sectional study that enrolled medical students at Sidney Kimmel Medical College and residents and fellows at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Through an online survey we determined the preferences of medical trainees for specific interventions throughout medical training when presented with different clinical scenarios. Interventions were organised into three categories: standard, intermediate and aggressive. We analysed responses to questions regarding different scenarios in separate repeated measures logistic regression models. The probability of declining medical interventions was modelled, and significant predictors of refusal of interventions were identified. Results Years of training was a significant predictor of declining interventions for several scenarios. When faced with permanent physical disability, increased years of training led to a higher rate of refusal of intermediate (OR = 1.14 [1.02‒1.28], p = 0.02) and aggressive interventions (OR = 1.15 [1.03‒1.28], p = 0.01). For the scenario of terminal illness with associated physical disability, years of training significantly influenced refusal of intermediate (OR = 1.14 [1.04‒1.26], p = 0.006) and aggressive (OR = 1.20 [1.08‒1.34], p = 0.001) interventions. For the scenario of permanent cognitive impairment, increased years of training led to a higher rate of refusal of standard (OR = 1.14 [1.01‒1.29], p = 0.03), intermediate (OR = 1.30 [1.13‒1.50], p

PHENOMENON: Medical students receive much of their inpatient teaching from residents who now experience restructured teaching services to accommodate the 2011 duty-hour regulations (DHR). The effect of DHR on medical student educational experiences is unknown. We examined medical students' and clerkship directors' perceptions of the effects of the 2011 DHR on internal medicine clerkship students' experiences with teaching, feedback and evaluation, and patient care.Students at 14 institutions responded to surveys after their medicine clerkship or subinternship. Students who completed their clerkship (n = 839) and subinternship (n = 228) March to June 2011 (pre-DHR historical controls) were compared to clerkship students (n = 895) and subinterns (n = 377) completing these rotations March to June 2012 (post-DHR). Z tests for proportions correcting for multiple comparisons were performed to assess attitude changes. The Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine annual survey queried institutional members about the 2011 DHR just after implementation.Survey response rates were 64% and 50% for clerkship students and 60% and 48% for subinterns in 2011 and 2012 respectively, and 82% (99/121) for clerkship directors. Post-DHR, more clerkship students agreed that attendings (p =.011) and interns (p =.044) provided effective teaching. Clerkship students (p =.013) and subinterns (p =.001) believed patient care became more fragmented. The percentage of holdover patients clerkship students (p =.001) and subinterns (p =.012) admitted increased. Clerkship directors perceived negative effects of DHR for students on all survey items. Most disagreed that interns (63.1%), residents (67.8%), or attendings (71.1%) had more time to teach. Most disagreed that students received more feedback from interns (56.0%) or residents (58.2%). Fifty-nine percent felt that students participated in more patient handoffs. INSIGHTS: Students perceive few adverse consequences of the 2011 DHR on their internal medicine experiences, whereas their clerkship director educators have negative perceptions. Future research should explore the impact of fragmented patient care on the student-patient relationship and students' clinical skills acquisition.

Background Variation in physicians' practice patterns contributes to unnecessary health care spending, yet the influences of modifiable determinants on practice patterns are not known. Identifying these mutable factors could reduce unnecessary testing and decrease variation in clinical practice. Objective To assess the importance of the residency program relative to physician personality traits in explaining variations in practice intensity (PI), the likelihood of ordering tests and treatments, and in the certainty of their intention to order. Methods We surveyed 690 interns and residents from 7 internal medicine residency programs, ranging from small community-based programs to large university residency programs. The surveys consisted of clinical vignettes designed to gauge respondents' preferences for aggressive clinical care, and questions assessing respondents' personality traits. The primary outcome was the participant-level mean response to 23 vignettes as a measure of PI. The secondary outcome was a certainty score (CS) constructed as the proportion of vignettes for which a respondent selected “definitely” versus “probably.” Results A total of 325 interns and residents responded to the survey (47% response rate). Measures of personality traits, subjective norms, demographics, and residency program indicators collectively explained 27.3% of PI variation. Residency program identity was the largest contributor. No personality traits were significantly independently associated with higher PI. The same collection of factors explained 17.1% of CS variation. Here, personality traits were responsible for 63.6% of the explained variation. Conclusions Residency program affiliations explained more of the variation in PI than demographic characteristics, personality traits, or subjective norms.

PURPOSE To compare how first-year (MS1) and fourth-year students (MS4) ascribe importance to lifestyle domains and specialty characteristics in specialty selection, and compare students' ratings with their primary care (PC) interest. METHOD In March 2013, MS4s from 11 U.S. MD-granting medical schools were surveyed. Using a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = not important at all; 5 = extremely important), respondents rated the importance of 5 lifestyle domains and 21 specialty selection characteristics. One-way analysis of variance was used to assess differences by PC interest among MS4s. Using logistic regression, ratings from MS4s were compared with prior analyses of ratings by MS1s who matriculated to the same 11 schools in 2012. RESULTS The response rate was 57% (965/1,701). MS4s, as compared with MS1s, rated as more important to good lifestyle: time off (4.3 versus 4.0), schedule control (4.2 versus 3.9), and financial compensation (3.4 versus 3.2). More MS4s than MS1s selected "time-off" (262/906 [30%] versus 136/969 [14%]) and "control of work schedule" (169/906 [19%] versus 146/969 [15%]) as the most important lifestyle domains. In both classes, PC interest was associated with higher ratings of working with the underserved and lower ratings of prestige and salary. CONCLUSIONS In the 2012-2013 academic year, matriculating students and graduating students had similar perceptions of lifestyle and specialty characteristics associated with PC interest. Graduating students placed more importance on schedule control and time off than matriculating students. Specialties should consider addressing a perceived lack of schedule control or inadequate time off to attract students.

Medical students are increasingly choosing non-primary-care specialties. Students consider lifestyle in selecting their specialty, but how entering medical students perceive lifestyle is unknown. This study investigates how first-year students value or rate lifestyle domains and specialty-selection characteristics and whether their ratings vary by interest in primary care (PC).During the 2012-2013 academic year, the authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of first-year medical students from 11 MD-granting medical schools. Using a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = not important at all; 5 = extremely important), respondents rated the importance of 5 domains of good lifestyle and 21 characteristics related to specialty selection. The authors classified students into five groups by PC interest and assessed differences by PC interest using one-way analysis of variance.Of 1,704 participants, 1,020 responded (60%). The option "type of work I am doing" was the highest-rated lifestyle domain (mean 4.8, standard deviation [SD] 0.6). "Being satisfied with the job" was the highest-rated specialty-selection characteristic (mean 4.7, SD 0.5). "Availability of practice locations in rural areas" was rated lowest (mean 2.0, SD 1.1). As PC interest decreased, the importance of "opportunities to work with underserved populations" also decreased, but importance of "average salary earned" increased (effect sizes of 0.98 and 0.94, respectively).First-year students valued enjoying work. The importance of financial compensation was inversely associated with interest in PC. Examining the determinants of enjoyable work may inform interventions to help students attain professional fulfillment in PC.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will require physicians to adopt appropriate use criteria, which promote using diagnostic tests of proven value based on the clinical context and avoid ...