Racial, Ethnic, and Language Inequities in Ambulatory Pediatrics Patient Family Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of patient race, patient-provider racial congruence, patient ethnicity, and family primary language with patient family experience (PFE) survey responses. METHODS: Cross-sectional review of PFE survey responses from all ambulatory medical encounters at a large, urban children's hospital system June 1, 2020-May 31, 2022. Exposures were patient race, patient-provider racial congruence, patient ethnicity, and family primary language. We adjusted analyses for neighborhood-level socioeconomic deprivation, patient sex and age, encounter specialty, and location of care. Outcomes were PFE survey scores for 5 questions focused on overall experience, respect, and safety; categorized using industry standard metric of presence of a "top-box" score, defined as a 9 or 10 for questions on an 11-point scale or as 4 on a 4-point scale. RESULTS: We included 89,175 surveys (15.6% response rate). The odds of having optimal, "top-box" responses for several assessed questions were lower for patients identified as Asian (e.g., adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40, 0.52) or Black (e.g., OR 0.65; CI 0.60, 0.70) compared to White, and for Hispanic (e.g., OR 0.84; CI 0.72, 0.97) compared to non-Hispanic. Similarly, the odds of having "top-box" scores were lower for Spanish-primary-language (e.g., OR 0.38; CI 0.30, 0.48) compared to English-primary-language patients. Patient-provider racial congruence had higher odds of "top-box" responses for 2 of 5 assessed questions (e.g., OR 1.18; CI 1.04, 1.35). CONCLUSIONS: We found previously unreported inequities in ambulatory pediatric PFE outcomes, with worse experiences reported by Asian, Black, Hispanic, and Spanish-language patients.

Microaggressions: Privileged Observers' Duty to Act and What They Can Do.

Racism and sexism that manifest as microaggressions are commonly experienced by members of minoritized groups. These actions and comments erode their subjects' vitality and sense of belonging. Individuals from minoritized groups are often left in a quandary, weighing the potential benefits and risks of addressing the comments. Placing the burden to interrupt bias on our marginalized colleagues is unjust. In part, it is inappropriate to expect them to dismantle a system that they did not create. It is essential for individuals with privilege who observe microaggressions to address the speaker and support their colleagues. In this Ethics Rounds, we present 2 cases in which individuals from minoritized groups experience racism and sexism that manifest as microaggressions. The first case involves a Black female physician making recommendations in a business meeting being characterized by a male colleague as emotional. The commentators analyze how both gender and race constrain the range of acceptable emotions one may exhibit and the harm that this causes. The second case involves a Black intern being identified by a parent as a custodian. Commentators describe how such microaggressions can harm trainees' performance and sense of belonging. In both cases, observers did nothing or only spoke to the subject in private. Commentators provide specific guidance regarding actions that bystanders can take to become upstanders and how they can decenter themselves and their discomfort and leverage their privilege to interrupt microaggressions. By becoming upstanders, individuals can remove the disproportionate responsibility for addressing microaggressions from marginalized colleagues.