Hesitant adopters: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among diverse vaccinated adults in the United States.

Background: Despite the United States (US) having an abundant supply of COVID-19 vaccines, vaccination rates lag behind other high-income countries, suggesting that vaccine hesitancy and attitudes play a greater role in public health measures than pure supply and access. With the acknowledgment that vaccination attitudes and status may or may not be correlated, this study examined COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among vaccinated US adults by asking: 1) What is the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the vaccinated? 2) Does COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy vary across sociodemographic characteristics? 3) Does COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy vary by healthcare access and influenza vaccination over the past 5 years? Methods: Data were collected through an online survey of 2022 US adults with a final analytic sample of 1383 vaccinated respondents. Results: Overall, 48.8% of vaccinated adults reported some level of hesitancy, while a slight majority reported they were "not at all hesitant". Younger respondents, women, and Black and American Indian or Alaska Native participants had greater adjusted odds of being more hesitant towards receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Respondents who had a primary care physician had greater adjusted odds than those who did not have a primary care physician of being more hesitant towards receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusions: This is the first population-based national sample study examining COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among vaccinated individuals from subgroups of distinctive backgrounds in order to inform targeted strategies for reducing vaccine hesitancy. Findings can assist in efforts to increase vaccination rates and also decrease vaccine hesitancy at the national level.

COVID-19 Booster Uptake: Are Hesitant Adopters Less Likely to Get a Booster Shot Than Nonhesitant Adopters?

The main objective of this study was to assess whether hesitancy toward receiving the initial COVID-19 vaccine was associated with uptake of the COVID-19 booster several months after it became available to all US adults. We ask whether hesitancy toward the initial COVID-19 vaccine was significantly associated with lower odds of COVID-19 booster uptake among adults. We test this association within the context of the highly rural state of Arkansas. By January 2022, the US had set a global record of nearly 1 million daily cases. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among those who have already received a dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and how that hesitancy may shape COVID-19 booster uptake. We analyzed data from a random sample survey of Arkansan adults (N = 2,201) between March 1 and March 28, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had received a vaccine (N = 1,649). Nearly two-thirds of vaccinated Arkansas residents had received a COVID-19 booster. Hesitancy was common even among vaccinated individuals and was significantly associated with reduced odds of COVID-19 booster uptake, even after controlling for other factors. Findings provide further support for conceptualizing vaccine hesitancy as an attitude related to-but separate from-the behavior of vaccination, as opposed to conflating vaccination with being nonhesitant. Public health interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 booster uptake should pay attention to vaccine hesitancy indicated at the initiation of the series and should not ignore the vaccinated as an important population to target for intervention.

Key Conversations and Trusted Information Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

COVID-19 vaccines effectively protect against COVID-19-related hospitalization or death, and 67.1% of the US population is fully vaccinated. However, the disparity in COVID-19 vaccination persists among minority and rural populations who often report greater hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccines. This exploratory study aimed to understand and document trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccine among a diverse sample of hesitant adopters with in-depth interviews. Participants (n = 21) described how information from trusted sources influenced their decision to get a COVID-19 vaccine despite being hesitant. Participants reported health care professionals, family members, friends, coworkers, community leaders, public health experts, government officials, and the mainstream media as trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccines. Participants discussed obtaining trusted information from multiple modes, including direct conversations with trusted messengers and public health communications from public influencers who reinforced the information shared with trusted messengers. Notably, participants discussed having multiple conversations with trusted messengers during their decision-making process, and these trusted messengers often facilitated the participants' vaccination process. Study findings highlight the continued need for clear, understandable information about vaccine side effects, safety, and efficacy to address concerns that contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Understanding Vaccination Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine Using the Increasing Vaccination Model.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was the third leading cause of death in 2021 in the United States and has led to historic declines in life expectancy for Americans. While vaccination is an effective mitigation strategy for COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy remains a major barrier to individual and population-level protection. An emerging literature on hesitant adopters of COVID-19 vaccines highlights co-occurrence of hesitancy and vaccine uptake as an understudied phenomenon, with the potential to provide insight into factors that lead hesitant individuals to become vaccinated despite their hesitancy. We use qualitative interviews among hesitant adopters in Arkansas to examine vaccine hesitancy among this understudied group. Drawing on the Increasing Vaccination Model, we find that the most frequently reported motivations of hesitant adopters were within the domain of social processes, pointing to a critical focal point for targeted health communications intervening in this domain (e.g. social norms, social networks, and altruistic behavior). We find that recommendations from health care workers (HCWs) other than physicians/providers may serve as an effective influence to vaccinate. We also demonstrate negative effects of low provider and HCW confidence and weak recommendations on motivations to vaccinate among individuals expressing vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we find individual information-seeking behaviors among hesitant adopters bolstered confidence in the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Based on these findings, clear, accessible, and authoritative health communication has a role in combatting the COVID-19 misinformation/disinformation infodemic.

Exploring the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of a culturally adapted group prenatal program, CenteringPregnancy, to reduce maternal and infant health disparities among Marshallese Pacific Islanders: A study protocol.

Background: Marshallese Pacific Islanders residing in the United States have higher rates of adverse perinatal outcomes than the general population and experience numerous barriers to prenatal care. CenteringPregnancy is a group prenatal care model which occurs in the patient's community. CenteringPregnancy, when applied to the Marshallese population, presents a potentially highly successful group-based intervention that can mitigate adverse perinatal outcomes among Marshallese Pacific Islanders. Methods: This article describes the protocol of a mixed-methods study designed to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the implementation of CenteringPregnancy for Marshallese Pacific Islander women. The mixed-methods design collects qualitative and quantitative data at the onset of CenteringPregnancy and during their last session and then augments the data with post-partum data abstraction. Conclusion: This will be the first study to culturally adapt and implement CenteringPregnancy with Marshallese pregnant women in the United States. This study will be an important first step to exploring the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of CenteringPregnancy and will better prepare the research team to assess and refine the intervention moving forward. Trial registration: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on September 22, 2020 under identifier NCT04558619 and can be accessed at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04558619?term=K%C5%8Dmmour+Prenatal&draw=2&rank=1.

Marshallese Mothers' and Marshallese Maternal Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Contraceptive Use and Reproductive Life Planning Practices and Influences.

Pacific Islander communities experience significant maternal and infant health disparities including high maternal and infant mortality. Contraception and reproductive life planning prevent approximately one-third of pregnancy-related deaths and neonatal deaths. We report the results of formative research devoted to understanding Marshallese mothers' as well as their maternal healthcare providers' practices and influences related to contraceptive use and reproductive life planning. This study used an exploratory, descriptive qualitative design to explore Marshallese mothers' and maternal healthcare providers' practices and influences of contraception use and reproductive life planning. Twenty participants were enrolled in the study, 15 Marshallese mothers and five Marshallese maternal healthcare providers. For the Marshallese mothers, two themes emerged: (1) Reproductive Life Planning Practices and Information; and (2) Reproductive Life Planning Influences. For the Marshallese maternal healthcare providers, two themes emerged: (1) Reproductive Life Planning Practices; and (2) Reproductive Life Planning Influences. This is the first study to document Marshallese mothers' and maternal healthcare providers' practices and influences with contraceptive use and reproductive life planning. Study results will inform the development of a culturally-adapted contraception and reproductive life planning tool with an educational program for Marshallese family units and maternal healthcare providers serving Marshallese women.

COVID-19 Monoclonal Antibody Administration Linked to Drop in Blood Pressure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

This study reports on hemodynamic changes observed during monoclonal antibody (mAb) administration for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome-coronavirus-2. Findings from this study may have implications for patient safety. Hemodynamic data from 705 patients who received subcutaneous or intravenous mAb therapy during February 1, 2021-September 30, 2021 in clinics in Arkansas, USA were reviewed. Descriptive statistics and paired t-tests were used to assess blood pressure before and after treatment. Results showed 386 (54.7%) patients experienced a drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP) or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >5 mmHg. The average drop in SBP was 9.2 mmHg for those patients. Two hundred and eighty-one (39.9%) patients experienced a drop in SBP of >10 mmHg with an average drop in SBP of 12.0 mmHg. The Emergency Use Authorization for mAb does not list hypotension as a contraindication for treatment. Our findings suggest mAb therapy should be administered in an environment where vitals are monitored.

Healthcare Access and Experiences of Racial Discrimination as Predictors of General Vaccine Hesitancy.

The literature regarding vaccine hesitancy is limited to specific vaccines rather than general vaccine hesitancy. No studies have examined the relationship of general vaccine hesitancy to healthcare access and experiences of racial discrimination. This study fills gaps by examining: (1) socio-demographic factors; (2) associations between healthcare access; and (3) experiences with racial discrimination and general vaccine hesitancy. Survey data were obtained from 2022 US adults from 7 September to 3 October 2021. Racial and ethnic minority populations were oversampled. Age, gender, race, and education were predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Asian respondents had less than two-thirds the odds of being vaccine hesitant. Healthcare access was associated with vaccine hesitancy. Not having health insurance coverage, not having a primary care provider, and not seeing a provider for a routine check-up in the past two years were associated with higher vaccine hesitancy. For every one-point increase in racial discrimination score (0-45), the odds of being more vaccine hesitant increased by a factor of 1.03. The findings demonstrate that policy, systems, and environmental factors are critical to addressing vaccine hesitancy. Given the associations between vaccine hesitancy and racial discrimination and healthcare access, more attention should be given to inequities in the healthcare systems in order to address vaccine hesitancy.

Associations between Influenza Vaccination and Health Care Access among Adults in the United States.

Few studies have investigated the relationship between influenza vaccination and health care access. Furthermore, despite the well-documented disparities in vaccine coverage for communities of color, few studies have examined how experiences of discrimination may influence vaccine uptake. To fill this gap in the literature, this study examined associations between 5-year influenza vaccination rates and sociodemographic characteristics, health care access, and racial discrimination. Age, race/ethnicity, education, health care coverage, primary care provider, no medical care due to cost, and routine doctor checkups were significant correlates of 5-year influenza vaccination. In contrast to previous studies, discrimination scores were not a significant correlate of regular influenza vaccination. Respondents who reported forgoing care due to cost were less likely to report vaccination every year out of the last 5 years compared to all of the less frequent categories combined, demonstrating a more complex association between sometimes not being able to afford medical care and influenza vaccination. Future research should examine the relationship between influenza vaccination uptake, racial discrimination, and forgone care due to cost to enhance resources and messaging for influenza vaccination uptake.

Associations Between General Vaccine Hesitancy and Healthcare Access Among Arkansans.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines provide protection against numerous diseases that can cause serious illness and death. However, vaccine hesitancy threatens to undermine progress in reducing preventable diseases and illness. Vaccine hesitancy has been shown to vary by sociodemographic characteristics. However, studies examining associations between healthcare access and vaccine hesitancy are lacking. OBJECTIVE: Using a statewide random sample of Arkansas adults, we examined the relationship between general vaccine hesitancy and healthcare access. DESIGN: From July 12 to 30, 2021, participants were contacted by landlines and cellular phones using random digit dialing. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1500 Arkansas adults were surveyed. Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx adults were oversampled to ensure adequate representation. The survey had a cooperation rate of 20%. MAIN MEASURES: The dependent variable was an ordinal measure of general vaccine hesitancy. Age, gender, race, education, relationship status, and rural/urban residence were included in the model. Healthcare access was measured across four domains: (1) health insurance coverage; (2) having a primary care provider (PCP); (3) forgoing care due to cost; and (4) time since last routine checkup. The relationship between general vaccine hesitancy and healthcare access was modeled using ordinal logistic regression, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Mean age was 48.5 years, 51.1% were women, 28% reported a race other than White, and 36.3% held a bachelor's degree or higher. Those with a PCP and those with health insurance had approximately two-thirds the odds of being more hesitant ([OR=0.63, CI=0.47, 0.84] and [OR=0.68; CI=0.49, 0.94]) than those without a PCP and those without health insurance. Participants reporting a routine checkup in the last 2 years were almost half as likely to be more hesitant than those reporting a checkup more than 2 years prior (OR=0.58; CI=0.43, 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest improving access to health insurance, PCPs, and routine preventative care services may be critical to reducing vaccine hesitancy.

Noninferiority of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Casirivimab/Imdevimab for Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 in a Real-World Setting.

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has emerged as one of the mainstay treatment options for SARS-CoV-2. To improve speed of delivery and decrease bedside nursing needs, subcutaneous (SC) delivery of mAbs has been explored as an alternative to standard intravenous (IV) administration. To date, data regarding the effectiveness of SC compared with IV mAb are lacking. This retrospective cohort analysis conducted between April 2021 and August 2021 compared hospitalization rates among patients receiving IV versus SC administration of casirivimab/imdevimab (Regen-COV) at a single institution in Arkansas. Casirivimab/imdevimab was a promising mAb therapy utilized during the height of the Delta variant surge of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Before resistance developed by the Omicron variant, casirivimab/imdevimab was utilized for outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 patients at risk of deterioration. Primary outcomes of this investigation were the 30-day post-treatment rate of hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) care during hospitalization. There was no increased risk of hospitalization or ICU care with SC administration compared with IV administration. As SARS-CoV-2 continues to mutate into variants such as Omicron and develop resistance to existing mAbs, these preliminary findings of noninferiority of SC versus IV warrant ongoing investigation into SC administration of other mAbs.

Hesitant adopters: An examination of hesitancy among adults in Arkansas who have taken the COVID-19 vaccine.

Recent research suggests people who report vaccine hesitancy may still get vaccinated; however, little is known about hesitancy among those who chose to vaccinate. The current study focused on individuals who received the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine despite their hesitancy, whom we refer to as "hesitant adopters." With the understanding that vaccine attitudes and vaccine behaviors may or may not be correlated, we examined the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among those who have been vaccinated, how COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy varies across sociodemographic groups, and how COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy relates to other factors (prior health care access and influenza vaccination behavior over the past 5 years). Random digit dialing of telephone landlines and cell phones was used to contact potential survey respondents, rendering a sample of 1500 Arkansan adults. Approximately one-third of those who received a COVID-19 vaccine also reported some level of hesitancy. Among hesitant adopters, 5.3% said they were "very hesitant," 8.8% said they were "somewhat hesitant," and 17.1% said they were "a little hesitant." Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx respondents reported more hesitancy than White respondents, and female respondents reported greater hesitancy compared to male respondents. Greater hesitancy was associated with non-metro/rural residence, forgoing health care due to cost, and lower influenza vaccination rates over the past 5 years. Findings suggest those who are hesitant may get vaccinated despite their hesitancy, illustrating the complexity of vaccination behaviors. Prevalence of hesitancy among the vaccinated has implications for communication strategies in vaccine outreach programs and may help to reduce stigmatization of hesitant adopters.

Associations between 5-year influenza vaccination and sociodemographic factors and healthcare access among Arkansans.

Despite wide availability, only 50.2% of the United States (US) adult population and 50.3% of adult Arkansans were vaccinated for influenza during the 2020-2021 influenza season. The proportion of the population vaccinated for influenza varies by age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, rural/urban residence, and income. However, measures of healthcare access have not been adequately investigated as predictors of influenza vaccination. Using a large, statewide random sample, this study examined 5-year influenza vaccination among Arkansans by sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, rural/urban residence), general vaccine hesitancy, and healthcare access (having a primary care provider, having health insurance, forgoing health care due to cost, and frequency of doctor checkups). Older age, being female, being Hispanic, having a bachelor's degree or higher, having a primary care provider, visiting a doctor for a checkup in the past two years, and lack of hesitancy towards vaccines were significant predictors of receiving influenza vaccination.

A systematic review of telehealth applications in hospital medicine.

BACKGROUND: Despite the proliferation of telehealth, uptake for acute inpatient services has been slower. Hospitalist shortages in rural and critical access hospitals as well as the COVID-19 pandemic have led to a renewed interest in telehealth to deliver acute inpatient services. Understanding current evidence is crucial for promoting uptake and developing evidence-based practices. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of telehealth applications in acute inpatient general medicine and pediatric hospital wards and synthesize available evidence. DATA SOURCES: A search of five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and ProQuest Theses, and Dissertations) using a combination of search terms including telemedicine and hospital medicine/inpatient care keywords yielded 17,015 citations. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent coders determined eligibility based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and organized into main categories based on findings: (1) feasibility and planning, (2) implementation and technology, and (3) telehealth application process and outcome measures. RESULTS: Of the 20 publications included, three were feasibility and planning studies describing the creation of the program, services provided, and potential cost implications. Five studies described implementation and technology used, including training, education, and evaluation methods. Finally, twelve discussed process and outcome measures, including patient and provider satisfaction and costs. CONCLUSION: Telehealth services for hospital medicine were found to be effective, well received, and initial cost estimates appear favorable. A variety of services were described across programs with considerable benefit appreciated by rural and smaller hospitals. Additional work is needed to evaluate clinical outcomes and overall program costs.

"It's Okay With Our Culture but We're in a Different Place and We Have to Show Respect": Marshallese Migrants and Exclusive Breastfeeding Initiation.

BACKGROUND: Pacific Islanders in the United States have lower initiation rates and shorter duration of exclusive breastfeeding compared to other racial/ethnic groups. RESEARCH AIM: To describe infant feeding beliefs and experiences of Marshallese living in the United States. METHODS: We used a prospective and cross-sectional exploratory, descriptive qualitative design with Marshallese participants (N = 36) residing in the United States between July 2019 and July 2020. Data were collected at 6-8 weeks postpartum. Our qualitative analytic approach integrated inductive and deductive techniques. RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 27.1 years (SD = 6.1), and 88.9% (n = 32) were born in the Marshall Islands. A majority of participants were single, widowed, or in an unmarried partnership (n = 28, 77.8%). Most participants had a high school education or lower (n = 30, 83.3%). Mean household size was 7.2 (SD = 2.8). Fewer than half of participants had no health insurance (n = 14, 38.9%), and almost all participants (91.7%) did not work at the time of data collection. Two themes emerged: 1) infant feeding initiation and practices; and 2) concerns over breastfeeding in public. The majority of participants' infants received both human milk and formula. Participants described beliefs that breastfeeding in public was against American customs, which influenced their decision about breastfeeding in public. CONCLUSIONS: Our study was the first to document infant feeding beliefs and experiences of Marshallese living in the United States at 6-8 weeks postpartum. Findings will inform future health education programs.

Best of Intentions: Influential Factors in Infant Feeding Intent among Marshallese Pregnant Women.

The purpose of this study is to explore the beliefs, intentions, and influences that serve as barriers and facilitators to exclusive breastfeeding intent among Marshallese pregnant women in the United States (US). The study used a descriptive qualitative design. In total, 36 Marshallese women in their third trimester of pregnancy participated. Participants described exclusive breastfeeding as the preferred method of infant feeding, from both individual and community perspectives. Exclusive breastfeeding was viewed as the healthiest for the infant, viewed as offering protection against sickness, and viewed as better for the overall development of the infant. Of the 36 participants, 28 participants (77.8%) stated that their infant feeding intentions included a hybrid of breastfeeding and formula feeding. The dominant barrier to exclusive breastfeeding was the need to work outside of the home. Unexpected barriers to exclusive breastfeeding were the desire for autonomy and a preference to exclusively breastfeed female infants more than male infants. Exclusive breastfeeding facilitators included support from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and support and encouragement from female family/community members. This study is the first to document beliefs, intentions, and influences that serve as barriers and facilitators to exclusive breastfeeding among Marshallese pregnant women residing in the US.

Motivations to Vaccinate Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

Vaccination is a critical means for mitigating the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). However, the initial high demand for COVID-19 vaccines has not persisted, and the rate of vaccination slowed significantly in the summer of 2021. This study seeks to understand the motivations to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among hesitant adopters. Hesitant adopters are individuals who express some level of hesitancy about the vaccine but have also received at least one dose of the vaccine. Using a qualitative descriptive design, three loci for motivation emerged during analysis: extrinsic motivators, intrinsic motivators, and structural motivators. Extrinsic motivations, such as protecting one's community, family, and friends, were reported as driving vaccination behavior. Among intrinsic motivators, the desire to protect themselves from COVID-19 was the most frequently reported. Structural motivators were also identified, indicating that vaccine mandates also serve to motivate hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine. These findings have important implications in ongoing efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US and highlight the multi-dimensional motivations for vaccination among hesitant adopters. Additionally, we provide recommendations for practice based on our findings.

Comparing community-driven COVID-19 vaccine distribution methods: Faith-based organizations vs. outpatient clinics.

Background: Minority and low socioeconomic communities may face practical barriers to vaccination, including decreased access to health care and less trust in healthcare organizations; however, few studies have focused on these barriers as the cause of differential vaccine uptake. We worked with community partners to implement and evaluate two community-driven approaches to COVID-19 vaccination distribution-through faith-based organizations (FBOs) and outpatient clinics-with a focus on understanding the differences between the populations who accessed each distribution method. Methodology: Participants who came to the vaccination locations were approached and asked to complete a survey during their 15 min post-vaccination observation period. Differences between distribution locations were examined using Chi-square tests. Results: The survey rendered 1,476 valid responses, with a total of 927 participants recruited at clinical locations and 519 at FBOs during vaccination events. There were significant differences by race/ethnicity, with distribution methods at FBOs reaching a higher proportion of Hispanic/Latino and Marshallese participants. The proportion of uninsured participants who had lower health literacy and had lower educational attainment was higher with the FBO distribution method. FBO participants were more likely to report "completely" trusting the COVID-19 vaccine. There was no significant difference between FBO and clinic participants with regard to the level of vaccine hesitancy. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to access. Conclusion: A higher proportion of Hispanic/Latino and Marshallese participants utilized FBOs for vaccination, suggesting collaborations with FBOs can potentially increase vaccination uptake among minority communities and help mitigate vaccination disparities.

Facilitators to vaccination among hesitant adopters.

To end the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to increase vaccine coverage in the United States (U.S.). In this study, we examine the facilitators that helped hesitant adopters - those who are both vaccinated and report some degree of hesitancy - overcome barriers to vaccination. Drawing on a sample of 867 hesitant adopters in Arkansas, we find social networks, individual actions, health care organizations and professionals, employers, religious communities and leaders, and the media all play a role in helping the vaccine hesitant overcome barriers to vaccination. Our findings demonstrate vaccine hesitancy and uptake occur simultaneously, and overcoming hesitancy in the U.S. population requires multifaceted strategies from multiple entities. We provide recommendations for overcoming barriers, including hesitancy, based on our findings.

Assessing Entrustable Professional Activities Using an Orientation OSCE: Identifying the Gaps.

BACKGROUND: A residency program's intern cohort is comprised of individuals from different medical schools that place varying levels of emphasis on Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency (CEPAERs). Program directors have expressed concerns about the preparedness of medical school graduates. Though guiding principles for implementation of the CEPAERs have been published, studies using this framework to assess interns' baseline skills during orientation are limited. OBJECTIVE: A CEPAER-based objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) was implemented with the aims to (1) assess each intern's baseline clinical skills and provide formative feedback; (2) determine an intern's readiness for resident responsibilities; (3) inform individualized education plans; and (4) address identified gaps through curricular change. METHODS: During orientation, all 33 interns from internal medicine (categorical, preliminary, and medicine-psychiatry) participated in the OSCE. Six 20-minute stations evaluated 8 EPAs. Faculty completed a global assessment, and standardized patients completed a communications checklist and global assessment. All interns completed a self-assessment of baseline skills and a post-OSCE survey. RESULTS: Stations assessing handoffs, informed consent, and subjective, objective, assessment, and plan (SOAP) note were the lowest-performing stations. Interns performed lower in skills for which they did not report previous training. Formal instruction was incorporated into didactic sessions for the lowest-performing stations. The majority of interns indicated that the assessment was useful, and immediate feedback was beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: This OSCE during orientation offers just-in-time baseline information regarding interns' critical skills and may lead to individualized feedback as well as continuous curricular improvement.