Disability-Specific Education in US Internal Medicine Primary Care Residency Programs: A Survey of Program Directors.

Phenomenon: The dearth of disability-specific education in United States medical schools and residency programs has perpetuated health care inequities experienced by people with disabilities. In this study, we surveyed internal medicine primary care residency program directors about the disability-specific education they offer their learners, their attitudes toward physicians' preparedness to care for people with disabilities, and their perceived challenges to offering more robust disability-specific education. Approach: We developed an on-line survey and forwarded it in 3 weekly emails during October of 2022 to 104 primary care residency program directors. We collected basic information about the residency programs and queried whether they were providing disability-specific education to their residents, which topics were being covered, and perceived barriers to offering additional disability-focused curricula. Data analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-squared, and independent samples t-tests. Findings: Forty-seven program directors responded (response rate 45.2%). The largest plurality of programs was in the Northeast, their average number of primary care residents was 15.6, most (67.4%) hosted primary care clinics in hospitals or academic centers, and 55.6% had affiliated divisions or departments of rehabilitation medicine. The majority of respondents felt that both internists and their own residents (88.3% and 77.8%, respectively) are inadequately educated in the care of people with disabilities, yet only 13 (28.9%) offered disability-focused curricula, and they tended to be narrow in scope. Only 8 of those 13 respondents (61.5%) reported that their disability curricula were required, rather than optional. Participants listed a number of barriers to implementing disability-focused education including a lack of advocacy for such work (65.2%), lack of time in the curriculum (63.0%), lack of expectation by educational governing boards that physicians understand disability-specific care considerations (60.9%), and lack of affiliated expertise in the care of people with disabilities (52.2%). Insights: While the program directors training future primary care physicians largely understand that physicians are inadequately prepared to offer equitable health care to individuals with disabilities, few of them are offering disability-specific education to their residents and most see significant barriers to doing so.

Conducting remote medical asylum evaluations in the United States during COVID-19: Clinicians' perspectives on acceptability, challenges and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, medical evaluations for asylum are being performed predominantly remotely. We sought to describe these evaluations and identify barriers. METHODOLOGY: This study utilized an online survey to assess clinician perspectives and experiences regarding remote asylum evaluations. RESULTS: Clinicians reported positive experiences regarding remote interpretation (85%, 51/60), history taking (82.4%, 61/74), rapport building (81.3%, 61/75), and conducting the psychiatric exam (65.7%, 44/67). Concerns were more frequently reported with performing remote physical examinations (83.3%, 15/18). Although the majority denied challenges with technology (62.5%, 45/72), internet (60.8%, 45/74) or clients having difficulty acquiring technology (58.6%, 41/70) or finding private spaces (54.2%, 39/72), these aspects did represent barriers. DISCUSSION: Remote evaluations were relatively easy to perform and acceptable to clinicians. This may facilitate easier access for asylum seekers beyond the pandemic.