Correction: The Story of #GetMePPE and GetUsPPE.org to Mobilize Health Care Response to COVID-19 : Rapidly Deploying Digital Tools for Better Health Care.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/20469.].

The Story of #GetMePPE and GetUsPPE.org to Mobilize Health Care Response to COVID-19 : Rapidly Deploying Digital Tools for Better Health Care.

Physicians, nurses, and other health care providers initiated the #GetMePPE movement on Twitter to spread awareness of the shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Dwindling supplies, such as face masks, gowns and goggles, and inadequate production to meet increasing demand have placed health care workers and patients at risk. The momentum of the #GetMePPE Twitter hashtag resulted in the creation of a petition to urge public officials to address the PPE shortage through increased funding and production. Simultaneously, the GetUsPPE.org website was launched through the collaboration of physicians and software engineers to develop a digital platform for the donation, request, and distribution of multi-modal sources of PPE. GetUsPPE.org and #GetMePPE were merged in an attempt to combine public engagement and advocacy on social media with the coordination of PPE donation and distribution. Within 10 days, over 1800 hospitals and PPE suppliers were registered in a database that enabled the rapid coordination and distribution of scarce and in-demand materials. One month after its launch, the organization had distributed hundreds of thousands of PPE items and had built a database of over 6000 PPE requesters. The call for action on social media and the rapid development of this digital tool created a productive channel for the public to contribute to the health care response to COVID-19 in meaningful ways. #GetMePPE and GetUsPPE.org were able to mobilize individuals and organizations outside of the health care system to address the unmet needs of the medical community. The success of GetUsPPE.org demonstrates the potential of digital tools as a platform for larger health care institutions to rapidly address urgent issues in health care. In this paper, we outline this process and discuss key factors determining success.

Best Practices for Lactation Support at Conferences and Standardized Testing Centers.

Breastfeeding has demonstrable benefits for children and their mothers; however, breastfeeding can be particularly difficult for women who return to the workplace in the months after a child's birth. The challenge of continuing to provide breast milk to an infant after a mother returns to work is evident in the day-to-day lives of health professionals who choose to do so and is reflected in the literature, which shows a marked reduction in breastfeeding rates corresponding to a woman's return to work. These barriers are even more apparent when travel is required for professional obligations or advancement, such as to attend or present at national conferences or to take standardized examinations at test centers. This article provides guidelines and practical advice for event organizers and testing centers to support a lactating mother's ability to provide for her child without compromising her professional career. In particular, we describe the physical requirements of lactation spaces, considerations for milk storage, ways to create a lactation-friendly environment, and unique considerations and accommodations for test takers and test centers. Supporting lactating health professionals should be seen as part of a larger endeavor to support gender equity, advance women in medicine, and integrate wellness and family into our professional lives.

Gender Differences in Faculty Rank Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to complete a comprehensive analysis of gender differences in faculty rank among U.S. emergency physicians that reflected all academic emergency physicians. METHODS: We assembled a comprehensive list of academic emergency medicine (EM) physicians with U.S. medical school faculty appointments from Doximity.com linked to detailed information on physician gender, age, years since residency completion, scientific authorship, National Institutes of Health (NIH) research funding, and participation in clinical trials. To estimate gender differences in faculty rank, multivariable logistic regression models were used that adjusted for these factors. RESULTS: Our study included 3,600 academic physicians (28%, or 1,016, female). Female emergency physicians were younger than their male colleagues (mean [±SD] age was 43.8 [±8.7] years for females and 47.4 [±9.9] years for males [p < 0.001]), had fewer years since residency completion (12.4 years vs. 15.6 years, p < 0.001), had fewer total and first/last author publications (4.7 vs. 8.6 total publications, p < 0.001; 4.3 vs. 7.1 first or last author publications, p < 0.001), and were less likely to be principal investigators on NIH grants (1.2% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.002) or clinical trials (1.8% vs. 4.4%, p < 0.001). In unadjusted analysis, male physicians were more likely than female physicians to hold the rank of associate or full professor versus assistant professor (13.7 percentage point difference, p < 0.001), a relationship that persisted after multivariable adjustment (5.5 percentage point difference, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Female academic EM physicians are less likely to hold the rank of associate or full professor compared to male physicians even after detailed adjustment for other factors that may influence faculty rank.

Taking the stage: a development programme for women speakers in emergency medicine.

Female physicians in the USA achieve associate and full professor rank at numbers disparate to their representation within emergency medicine (EM). The authors describe a novel curriculum aimed at developing women speakers as a step on the journey towards academic recognition. In this pilot programme, four female physicians at a single academic emergency department participated in a year-long Speaker Development Programme (SDP), and all presented in at least one national EM conference at SDP completion. Participants reported improved speaking skills, confidence and drive to present externally. Elements to success were mentor engagement, encouragement by the departmental chair and creation of a growth and belonging mindset within the cohort. Future steps include creating a framework for maintaining the SDP beyond the pilot phase, such as ensuring access to curriculum materials, and retaining an experienced external mentor over time.

Current Status of Gender and Racial/Ethnic Disparities Among Academic Emergency Medicine Physicians.

OBJECTIVE: A 2010 survey identified disparities in salaries by gender and underrepresented minorities (URM). With an increase in the emergency medicine (EM) workforce since, we aimed to 1) describe the current status of academic EM workforce by gender, race, and rank and 2) evaluate if disparities still exist in salary or rank by gender. METHODS: Information on demographics, rank, clinical commitment, and base and total annual salary for full-time faculty members in U.S. academic emergency departments were collected in 2015 via the Academy of Administrators in Academic Emergency Medicine (AAAEM) Salary Survey. Multiple linear regression was used to compare salary by gender while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Response rate was 47% (47/101), yielding data on 1,371 full-time faculty: 33% women, 78% white, 4% black, 5% Asian, 3% Asian Indian, 4% other, and 7% unknown race. Comparing white race to nonwhite, 62% versus 69% were instructor/assistant, 23% versus 20% were associate, and 15% versus 10% were full professors. Comparing women to men, 74% versus 59% were instructor/assistant, 19% versus 24% were associate, and 7% versus 17% were full professors. Of 113 chair/vice-chair positions, only 15% were women, and 18% were nonwhite. Women were more often fellowship trained (37% vs. 31%), less often core faculty (59% vs. 64%), with fewer administrative roles (47% vs. 57%; all p < 0.05) but worked similar clinical hours (mean ± SD = 1,069 ± 371 hours vs. 1,051 ± 393 hours). Mean overall salary was $278,631 (SD ± $68,003). The mean (±SD) salary of women was $19,418 (±$3,736) less than men (p < 0.001), even after adjusting for race, region, rank, years of experience, clinical hours, core faculty status, administrative roles, board certification, and fellowship training. CONCLUSIONS: In 2015, disparities in salary and rank persist among full-time U.S. academic EM faculty. There were gender and URM disparities in rank and leadership positions. Women earned less than men regardless of rank, clinical hours, or training. Future efforts should focus on evaluating salary data by race and developing systemwide practices to eliminate disparities.

What Do They Want from Us? A Survey of EM Program Directors on EM Application Criteria.

INTRODUCTION: Although a relatively young specialty, emergency medicine (EM) is popular among medical students and is one of the most competitive large specialties. Consequently, students increasingly seek more opportunity to differentiate themselves from their colleagues by pursuing more clerkships at the cost of taking out additional loans: this despite the fact that those who match in EM typically do so in their top three choices. We sought to ascertain what factors EM program directors seek in their typical candidate. METHODS: We recruited EM program directors via the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors email listserv to participate in an anonymous survey regarding the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), the number of standardized letters of evaluation (SLOE), and the number of EM rotations during the fourth year. RESULTS: 135 respondents completed the anonymous survey: 59% of respondents stated their program did not have a minimum USMLE Step 1 score, but 39% reported a minimum score of 210 or higher; 95% of programs do not require Step 2 to grant an interview, but 46% require it to place the student on the rank list; 80% require only one EM rotation to grant an interview and none require more than two; 95% of programs will accept two SLOEs for both application and rank list placement. CONCLUSION: For the typical EM applicant, there is likely little benefit to performing more than two rotations and obtaining more than two SLOEs. Students can defer USMLE Step 2 but must complete it by the time rank lists are due. Our study was limited by the anonymity of the survey, and comments by the respondents revealed the questions did not account for some nuances programs apply to their application review process.

The Development of Best Practice Recommendations to Support the Hiring, Recruitment, and Advancement of Women Physicians in Emergency Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Women in medicine continue to experience disparities in earnings, promotion, and leadership roles. There are few guidelines in place defining organization-level factors that promote a supportive workplace environment beneficial to women in emergency medicine (EM). We assembled a working group with the goal of developing specific and feasible recommendations to support women's professional development in both community and academic EM settings. METHODS: We formed a working group from the leadership of two EM women's organizations, the Academy of Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) and the American Association of Women Emergency Physicians (AAWEP). Through a literature search and discussion, working group members identified four domains where organizational policies and practices supportive of women were needed: 1) global approaches to supporting the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in EM; 2) recruitment, hiring, and compensation of women emergency physicians; 3) supporting development and advancement of women in EM; and 4) physician health and wellness (in the context of pregnancy, childbirth, and maternity leave). Within each of these domains, the working group created an initial set of specific recommendations. The working group then recruited a stakeholder group of EM physician leaders across the country, selecting for diversity in practice setting, geographic location, age, race, and gender. Stakeholders were asked to score and provide feedback on each of the recommendations. Specific recommendations were retained by the working group if they achieved high rates of approval from the stakeholder group for importance and perceived feasibility. Those with >80% agreement on importance and >50% agreement on feasibility were retained. Finally, recommendations were posted in an open online forum (blog) and invited public commentary. RESULTS: An initial set of 29 potential recommendations was created by the working group. After stakeholder voting and feedback, 16 final recommendations were retained. Recommendations were refined through qualitative comments from stakeholders and blog respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Using a consensus building process that included male and female stakeholders from both academic and community EM settings, we developed recommendations for organizations to implement to create a workplace environment supportive of women in EM that were perceived as acceptable and feasible. This process may serve as a model for other medical specialties to establish clear, discrete organization-level practices aimed at supporting women physicians.

Should osteopathic students applying to allopathic emergency medicine programs take the USMLE Exam?

INTRODUCTION: Board scores are an important aspect of an emergency medicine (EM) residency application. Residency directors use these standardized tests to objectively evaluate an applicant's potential and help decide whether to interview a candidate. While allopathic (MD) students take the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), osteopathic (DO) students take the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX). It is difficult to compare these scores. Previous literature proposed an equation to predict USMLE based on COMLEX. Recent analyses suggested this may no longer be accurate. DO students applying to allopathic programs frequently ask whether they should take USMLE to overcome this potential disadvantage. The objective of the study is to compare the likelihood to match of DO applicants who reported USMLE to those who did not, and to clarify how important program directors consider it is whether or not an osteopathic applicant reported a USMLE score. METHODS: We conducted a review of Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data for 2010-2011 in conjunction with a survey of EM residency programs. We reviewed the number of allopathic and osteopathic applicants, the number of osteopathic applicants who reported a USMLE score, and the percentage of successful match. We compared the percentage of osteopathic applicants who reported a USMLE score who matched compared to those who did not report USMLE. We also surveyed allopathic EM residency programs to understand how important it is that osteopathic (DO) students take USMLE. RESULTS: There were 1,482 MD students ranked EM programs; 1,277 (86%, 95% CI 84.3-87.9) matched. There were 350 DO students ranked EM programs; 181 (52%, 95% CI 46.4-57.0) matched (difference=34%, 95% CI 29.8-39.0, p<0.0001). There were 208 DO students reported USMLE; 126 (61%, 95% CI 53.6-67.2) matched. 142 did not report USMLE; 55 (39%, 95% CI 30.7-47.3) matched (difference=22%, 95% CI 11.2-32.5, p<0.0001). Survey results: 39% of program directors reported that it is extremely important that osteopathic students take USMLE, 38% stated it is somewhat important, and 22% responded not at all important. CONCLUSION: DO students who reported USMLE were more likely to match. DO students applying to allopathic EM programs should consider taking USMLE to improve their chances of a successful match.

Abnormal urine color.

A change in urine color can be distressing for patients and physicians alike. Many of the causes of abnormal urine color are benign effects of medications and foods; however, a change in urine color may be a sign of an underlying pathological condition. The good news is that in many cases the diagnosis can be determined from a thorough history and urinalysis. This article presents many of the conditions physicians may encounter and will help them form a narrow differential diagnosis and treatment plan.

Pilot study on documentation skills: is there adequate training in emergency medicine residency?

BACKGROUND: Thorough and accurate documentation in the medical record is important, and documentation skills should be an integral component of emergency medicine (EM) residency training. STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the documentation skills of EM residents as they relate to emergency department (ED) reimbursement. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study. We reviewed all charts of patients presenting to the adult ED during a 2-week period. We compared three groups: patients seen primarily by an EM resident, patients seen primarily by a physician assistant (PA), and patients seen primarily by an attending emergency physician. Outcome measures were the incidence of downcodes and dollars lost to downcodes in all groups. RESULTS: There were 212 patients in the resident group, 683 patients in the PA group, and 437 patients in the attending group. There were 12 downcodes (5.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.96-9.70) in the resident group, 10 downcodes (1.5%, 95% CI 0.70-2.68) in the PA group, and 17 downcodes (3.9%, 95% CI 2.28-6.14) in the attending group (p = 0.002). The mean dollar lost per patient seen in the resident group was $3.21 (95% CI 1.41-5.00); $0.91 (95% CI 0.33-1.49) in the PA group; and $2.23 (95% CI 1.17-3.28) in the attending group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Charts documented primarily by EM residents were more likely to be downcoded than charts documented primarily by PAs or ED attendings. This downcode rate resulted in a greater loss of revenue in the resident group. We believe this represents an area for improvement in EM residency education.