A framework to understand the needs of the medical students of the future.

Purpose: Medical education is undergoing curricular reform driven by internal needs and external pressures. Concurrently, medical students are changing. More diverse student bodies, particularly those from underrepresented minorities, bring different skill sets, needs and priorities to their medical school education. Here we present their voices.Methods: In order to explore the stories, needs and motivations of future physicians, we conducted a small-scale study of students from diverse backgrounds in US medical schools. Our interviews revealed two core themes about medical school: (1) that medical school is an extreme physical and emotional challenge for all students, and (2) that medical school education consists of multiple conflicting goals. Combining the two themes provides a descriptive topology of student's motivations and strategies for getting through medical school. Using this framework, we deconstruct the experience of medical school to reveal the gaps and misalignments between the traditional system of medical education and what medical students want, expect and need to be successful.Conclusions: We discuss the implications of our research and this framework for curricula and the learning environment with a particular focus on (1) cooperative learning and social interdependence theory and (2) an expanded understanding of diversity and the needs of under-represented students.

Self-care habits among people who inject drugs with skin and soft tissue infections: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Injection drug use is on the rise in the USA, and skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) are a common complication, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Due to structural barriers to care-seeking, many people who inject drugs avoid formal care and resort to self-care techniques, but little is known about the nature of these techniques, or more generally about the accuracy or breadth of this population's knowledge of SSTIs. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 12 people who inject heroin in two metropolitan areas: Sacramento and Boston, USA. RESULTS: These interviews reveal a robust and accurate knowledge base regarding skin infections, including the progression from simple cellulitis to an abscess, and acknowledgment of the possibility of serious infections. Nonetheless, there remains a reticence to seek care secondary to past traumatic experiences. A step-wise approach to self-care of SSTI infections was identified, which included themes of whole-body health, topical applications, use of non-prescribed antibiotics, and incision and drainage by non-medical providers. CONCLUSIONS: The reported SSTI self-care strategies demonstrate resilience and ingenuity, but also raise serious concerns about inappropriate antibiotic consumption and complications of invasive surgical procedures performed without proper training, technique, or materials. Harm reduction agencies and health care providers should work to obviate the need for these potentially dangerous practices by improving healthcare access for this population. In the absence of robust solutions to meet the needs of this population, education materials should be developed to optimize the efficacy and minimize the harms of these practices, while empowering and supporting the autonomy of people who use drugs and providing clear guidance on when self-care should be abandoned in favor of formal medical care.

Adverse Childhood Experiences in Medical Students: Implications for Wellness.

OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of the study was to assess the prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in a cohort of third-year medical students and characterize their childhood protective factors. METHODS: The authors developed a web-based anonymous survey distributed to all third-year medical students in one school (N = 98). The survey included the 10-item ACE Study questionnaire, a list of childhood protective factors (CPF) and questions to assess students' perception of the impact of ACEs on their physical and mental health. The medical school's IRB approved the student survey as an exempt study. The authors computed descriptive and comparative statistical analyses. RESULTS: Eighty-six of 98 students responded (88% response rate). Forty-four students (51%) reported at least one ACE exposure and 10 (12%) reported ≥ 4 exposures. The latter were all female. The average difference in the ACE score between male and female medical students was - 1.1 (independent t test with unequal variances t(57.7) = - 2.82, P = .007). Students with an ACE score of ≥ 4 were significantly more likely to report a moderate or significant effect on their mental health, compared with students with scores ≤ 3 (chi-square test, P = < .0001). Most students reported high levels of CPF (median score = 13 of a maximum score = 14). ACEs and CPF were inversely associated (Pearson correlation = - 0.32, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: A sizeable minority of medical students reported exposure to multiple ACEs. If replicated, findings suggest a significant vulnerability of these medical students to health risk behaviors and physical and mental health problems during training and future medical practice.

One Health-One Education: Medical and Veterinary Inter-Professional Training.

Physicians and veterinarians are increasingly expected to collaborate across disciplines; however, in most cases their education and training remain isolated within their respective professions. Medical and veterinary students are rarely provided with opportunities for inter-professional learning during their coursework and clinical training. One Health serves as an ideal framework for developing problem-focused curricula that promote inter-professional teamwork. One Health issues (e.g., zoonotic diseases, water pollution, toxic waste, impact of climate change, and food safety and security) not only engage students across disciplines, but require faculty and senior leadership across various health-related fields to share knowledge and balance perspectives throughout curriculum development and implementation. In this article, we report on one of several interactive, small-group, case-based One Health curricular exercises developed collaboratively by students and faculty in our Schools of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine to ensure that all students, regardless of background or intended specialty, would receive a basic introduction to inter-professional collaboration in the context of a One Health clinical problem of the sort they might encounter in their future practice. Toxoplasmosis ( Toxoplasma gondii infection) was selected as the first case because of the potentially different perspectives that medical and veterinary practitioners may have on advising a pregnant woman with regard to risk factors, prevention, testing, and treatment. Our goal was to develop an evidence-based approach to this clinical case that could be used by both professions to assess environmental and zoonotic risk factors for T. gondii in human pregnancies.

Increasing confidence and changing behaviors in primary care providers engaged in genetic counselling.

BACKGROUND: Screening and counseling for genetic conditions is an increasingly important part of primary care practice, particularly given the paucity of genetic counselors in the United States. However, primary care physicians (PCPs) often have an inadequate understanding of evidence-based screening; communication approaches that encourage shared decision-making; ethical, legal, and social implication (ELSI) issues related to screening for genetic mutations; and the basics of clinical genetics. This study explored whether an interactive, web-based genetics curriculum directed at PCPs in non-academic primary care settings was superior at changing practice knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors when compared to a traditional educational approach, particularly when discussing common genetic conditions. METHODS: One hundred twenty one PCPs in California and Pennsylvania physician practices were randomized to either an Intervention Group (IG) or Control Group (CG). IG physicians completed a 6 h interactive web-based curriculum covering communication skills, basics of genetic testing, risk assessment, ELSI issues and practice behaviors. CG physicians were provided with a traditional approach to Continuing Medical Education (CME) (clinical review articles) offering equivalent information. RESULTS: PCPs in the Intervention Group showed greater increases in knowledge compared to the Control Group. Intervention PCPs were also more satisfied with the educational materials, and more confident in their genetics knowledge and skills compared to those receiving traditional CME materials. Intervention PCPs felt that the web-based curriculum covered medical management, genetics, and ELSI issues significantly better than did the Control Group, and in comparison with traditional curricula. The Intervention Group felt the online tools offered several advantages, and engaged in better shared decision making with standardized patients, however, there was no difference in behavior change between groups with regard to increases in ELSI discussions between PCPs and patients. CONCLUSION: While our intervention was deemed more enjoyable, demonstrated significant factual learning and retention, and increased shared decision making practices, there were few differences in behavior changes around ELSI discussions. Unfortunately, barriers to implementing behavior change in clinical genetics is not unique to our intervention. Perhaps the missing element is that busy physicians need systems-level support to engage in meaningful discussions around genetics issues. The next step in promoting active engagement between doctors and patients may be to put into place the tools needed for PCPs to easily access the materials they need at the point-of-care to engage in joint discussions around clinical genetics.

Impact of a randomized controlled educational trial to improve physician practice behaviors around screening for inherited breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many primary care physicians (PCPs) are ill-equipped to provide screening and counseling for inherited breast cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of an interactive web-based genetics curriculum versus text curriculum for primary care physicians. DESIGN: Randomized two-group design. PARTICIPANTS: 121 California and Pennsylvania community physicians. INTERVENTION: Web-based interactive genetics curriculum, evaluated against a control group of physicians who studied genetics review articles. After education, physicians interacted with an announced standardized patient (SP) at risk for inherited breast cancer. MAIN MEASURES: Transcripts of visit discussions were coded for presence or absence of 69 topics relevant to inherited breast cancer. KEY RESULTS: Across all physicians, history-taking, discussions of test result implications, and exploration of ethical and legal issues were incomplete. Approximately half of physicians offered a genetic counseling referral (54.6%), and fewer (43.8%) recommended testing. Intervention physicians were more likely than controls to explore genetic counseling benefits (78.3% versus 60.7%, P = 0.048), encourage genetic counseling before testing (38.3% versus 21.3%, P = 0.048), ask about a family history of prostate cancer (25.0% versus 6.6%, P = 0.006), and report that a positive result indicated an increased risk of prostate cancer for male relatives (20.0% versus 1.6%, P = 0.001). Intervention-group physicians were less likely than controls to ask about Ashkenazi heritage (13.3% versus 34.4%, P = 0.01) or to reply that they would get tested when asked, "What would you do?" (33.3% versus 54.1%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians infrequently performed key counseling behaviors, and this was true regardless of whether they had completed the web-based interactive training or read clinical reviews.

Pharmaceutical sales representatives and patient safety: a comparative prospective study of information quality in Canada, France and the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The information provided by pharmaceutical sales representatives has been shown to influence prescribing. To enable safe prescribing, medicines information must include harm as well as benefits. Regulation supports this aim, but relative effectiveness of different approaches is not known. The United States (US) and France directly regulate drug promotion; Canada relies on industry self-regulation. France has the strictest information standards. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study in Montreal, Vancouver, Sacramento and Toulouse. We recruited random samples of primary care physicians from May 2009 to June 2010 to report on consecutive sales visits. The primary outcome measure was "minimally adequate safety information" (mention of at least one indication, serious adverse event, common adverse event, and contraindication, and no unqualified safety claims or unapproved indications). RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-five physicians reported on 1,692 drug-specific promotions. "Minimally adequate safety information" did not differ: 1.7 % of promotions; range 0.9-3.0 % per site. Sales representatives provided some vs. no information on harm more often in Toulouse than in Montreal and Vancouver: 61 % vs. 34 %, OR = 4.0; 95 % CI 2.8-5.6, or Sacramento (39 %), OR = 2.4; 95 % CI 1.7-3.6. Serious adverse events were rarely mentioned (5-6 % of promotions in all four sites), although 45 % of promotions were for drugs with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "black box" warnings of serious risks. Nevertheless, physicians judged the quality of scientific information to be good or excellent in 901 (54 %) of promotions, and indicated readiness to prescribe 64 % of the time. DISCUSSION: "Minimally adequate safety information" did not differ in the US and Canadian sites, despite regulatory differences. In Toulouse, consistent with stricter standards, more harm information was provided. However, in all sites, physicians were rarely informed about serious adverse events, raising questions about whether current approaches to regulation of sales representatives adequately protect patient health.

Physician communication regarding prostate cancer screening: analysis of unannounced standardized patient visits.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a controversial issue. The present study aimed to explore physician behaviors during an unannounced standardized patient encounter that was part of a randomized controlled trial to educate physicians using a prostate cancer screening, interactive, Web-based module. METHODS: Participants included 118 internal medicine and family medicine physicians from 5 health systems in California, in 2007-2008. Control physicians received usual education about prostate cancer screening (brochures from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention). Intervention physicians participated in the prostate cancer screening module. Within 3 months, all physicians saw unannounced standardized patients who prompted prostate cancer screening discussions in clinic. The encounter was audio-recorded, and the recordings were transcribed. Authors analyzed physician behaviors around screening: (1) engagement after prompting, (2) degree of shared decision making, and (3) final recommendations for prostate cancer screening. RESULTS: After prompting, 90% of physicians discussed prostate cancer screening. In comparison with control physicians, intervention physicians showed somewhat more shared decision making behaviors (intervention 14 items vs control 11 items, P <.05), were more likely to mention no screening as an option (intervention 63% vs control 26%, P <.05), to encourage patients to consider different screening options (intervention 62% vs control 39%, P <.05) and seeking input from others (intervention 25% vs control 7%, P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: A brief Web-based interactive educational intervention can improve shared decision making, neutrality in recommendation, and reduce PSA test ordering. Engaging patients in discussion of the uses and limitations of tests with uncertain value can decrease utilization of the tests.

Pairing physician education with patient activation to improve shared decisions in prostate cancer screening: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most expert groups recommend shared decision making for prostate cancer screening. Most primary care physicians, however, routinely order a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test with little or no discussion about whether they believe the potential benefits justify the risk of harm. We sought to assess whether educating primary care physicians and activating their patients to ask about prostate cancer screening had a synergistic effect on shared decision making, rates and types of discussions about prostate cancer screening, and the physician's final recommendations. METHODS: Our study was a cluster randomized controlled trial among primary care physicians and their patients, comparing usual education (control), with physician education alone (MD-Ed), and with physician education and patient activation (MD-Ed+A). Participants included 120 physicians in 5 group practices, and 712 male patients aged 50 to 75 years. The interventions comprised a Web-based educational program for all intervention physicians and MD-Ed+A patients compared with usual education (brochures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). The primary outcome measure was patients' reported postvisit shared decision making regarding prostate cancer screening; secondary measures included unannounced standardized patients' reported shared decision making and the physician's recommendation for prostate cancer screening. RESULTS: Patients' ratings of shared decision making were moderate and did not differ between groups. MD-Ed+A patients reported that physicians had higher prostate cancer screening discussion rates (MD-Ed+A = 65%, MD-Ed = 41%, control=38%; P <.01). Standardized patients reported that physicians seeing MD-Ed+A patients were more neutral during prostate cancer screening recommendations (MD-Ed+A=50%, MD-Ed=33%, control=15%; P <.05). Of the male patients, 80% had had previous PSA tests. CONCLUSIONS: Although activating physicians and patients did not lead to significant changes in all aspects of physician attitudes and behaviors that we studied, interventions that involved physicians did have a large effect on their attitudes toward screening and in the discussions they had with patients, including their being more likely than control physicians to engage in prostate cancer screening discussions and more likely to be neutral in their final recommendations.

Implementation outcomes of a multiinstitutional web-based ethical, legal, and social implications genetics curriculum for primary care residents in three specialties.

PURPOSE: Medical genetics lends itself to disseminated teaching methods because of mismatches between numbers of physicians having patients with genetic disorders and availability of genetic specialists. METHOD: During 3 years, we implemented an interactive, web-based curriculum on ethical, legal, and social implications in medical genetics for primary care residents in three specialties at three institutions. Residents took five (of 10) cases and three (of five) tutorials that varied by specialty. We assessed changes in self-efficacy (primary outcome), knowledge, application, and viewpoints. RESULTS: Overall enrollment was 69% (279/403). One institution did not complete implementation and was dropped from pre-post comparisons. We developed a six-factor ethical, legal, and social implications self-efficacy scale (Cronbach α = 0.95). Baseline self-efficacy was moderate (71/115; range: 23-115) and increased 15% after participation. Pre-post knowledge scores were high and unchanged. Residents reported that this curriculum covered ethical, legal, and social implications/genetics better than their usual curricula. Most (68-91%) identified advantages, especially in providing flexibility and stimulating self-directed learning. After participation, residents reported creating learning goals (66%) and acting on those goals (62%). CONCLUSIONS: Ethical, legal, and social implications genetics curricular participation led to modest self-efficacy gains. Residents reported that the curriculum covered unique content areas, had advantages over traditional curriculum, and that they applied ethical, legal, and social implications content clinically. We share lessons from developing and implementing this complex web-based curriculum across multiple institutions.

Gender Differences and Influencing Factors in Specialty Choices: Findings From One Medical School in China.

Background: Gender plays a significant role in the selection of medical specialty. Few studies have been conducted to explore the impact of gender differences on specialty choosing among Chinese medical students. Methods: The specialty choices of 648 students from six consecutive classes in an 8-year MD program were collected and compared between male and female students. A total of 110 students from one graduating class were surveyed by a questionnaire covering 22 career influencing factors. Each factor has a scale of zero to three (zero = no influence, one = mild influence, two = moderate influence, and three = strong influence). Results: Statistically significant gender differences were observed in 10 out of 16 specialties. Most male students limited their specialty choices to surgery (64%), internal medicine (12%), and orthopedics (12%), compared with a relatively diversified pattern in female students. For male students, the top three influencing factors were personal interest, future job prospects for the chosen specialty, and job opportunity in academic medicine. The strongest influencing factors of females were personal interest, specialty-specific knowledge and skills, and the sense of achievement. The expected salary was ranked among the top 10 influencing factors in male but not in females, while the work-life balance was ranked among the top 10 factors in females but not in males. Conclusion: There is a significant gender difference regarding specialty choices among Chinese medical students. Career coaching is needed to help students in their specialty choosing process.

Negative experiences of pain and withdrawal create barriers to abscess care for people who inject heroin. A mixed methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are prevalent among people who inject heroin (PWIH). Delays in seeking health care lead to increased costs and potential mortality, yet the barriers to accessing care among PWIHs are poorly understood. METHODS: We administered a quantitative survey (N = 145) and conducted qualitative interviews (N = 12) with PWIH seeking syringe exchange services in two U.S. cities. RESULTS: 66% of participants had experienced at least one SSTI. 38% reported waiting two weeks or more to seek care, and 57% reported leaving the hospital against medical advice. 54% reported undergoing a drainage procedure performed by a non-medical professional, and 32% reported taking antibiotics that were not prescribed to them. Two of the most common reasons for these behaviors were fear of withdrawal symptoms and inadequate pain control, and these reasons emerged as prominent themes in the qualitative findings. These issues are often predicated on previous negative experiences and exacerbated by stigma and an asymmetrical power dynamic with providers, resulting in perceived barriers to seeking and completing care for SSTIs. CONCLUSIONS: For PWIH, unaddressed pain and withdrawal symptoms contribute to profoundly negative health care experiences, which then generate motivation for delaying care SSTI seeking and for discharge against medical advice. Health care providers and hospitals should develop policies to improve pain control, manage opioid withdrawal, minimize prejudice and stigma, and optimize communication with PWIH. These barriers should also be addressed by providing medical care in accessible and acceptable venues, such as safe injection facilities, street outreach, and other harm reduction venues.

Reconciling a "pleasant exchange" with evidence of information bias: A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To examine and compare the experiences and attitudes of primary care physicians in three different regulatory environments (United States, Canada, and France) towards interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives, particularly their perspectives on safety information provision and self-reported influences on prescribing. METHODS: We recruited primary care physicians for 12 focus groups in Montreal, Sacramento, Toulouse and Vancouver. A thematic analysis of the interview data followed a five-stage framework analysis approach. RESULTS: Fifty-seven family physicians (19 women, 38 men) participated. Physicians expected a commercial bias and generally considered themselves to be immune from influence. They also appreciated the exchange and the information on new drugs. Across all sites, physicians expressed concern about missing harm information; however, attitudes to increased regulation of sales visits in France and the US were generally negative. A common solution to inadequate harm information was to seek further commercially sourced information. Physicians at all sites also expressed sensitivity to critiques from medical students and residents about promotional interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians have contradictory views on the inadequate harm information received from sales representatives, linked to their lack of awareness of the drugs' safety profiles. Commonly used strategies to mitigate information bias are unlikely to be effective. Alternate information sources to inform prescribing decisions, and changes in the way that physicians and sales representatives interact are needed.

Injection-site vein loss and soft tissue abscesses associated with black tar heroin injection: A cross-sectional study of two distinct populations in USA.

BACKGROUND: Injection-site vein loss and skin abscesses impose significant morbidity on people who inject drugs (PWID). The two common forms of street heroin available in the USA include black tar and powder heroin. Little research has investigated these different forms of heroin and their potential implications for health outcomes. METHODS: A multiple-choice survey was administered to a sample of 145 participants seeking services at reduction facilities in both Sacramento, CA and greater Boston, MA, USA. Multivariate regression models for reporting one or more abscesses in one year, injection-site veins lost in six months, and soft tissue injection. RESULTS: Participants in Sacramento exclusively used black tar (99%), while those in Boston used powder heroin (96%). Those who used black tar heroin lost more injection-site veins (ß=2.34, 95% CI: 0.66-4.03) and were more likely to report abscesses (AOR=7.68, 95% CI: 3.01-19.60). Soft tissue injection was also associated with abscesses (AOR=4.68, 95% CI: 1.84-11.93). Consistent venous access (AOR: 0.088, 95% CI: 0.011-0.74) and losing more injection sites (AOR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.03-1.45) were associated with soft tissue injection. CONCLUSION: Use of black tar heroin is associated with more frequent abscesses and more extensive vein loss. Poor venous access predisposes people who inject drugs to soft tissue injection, which may constitute a causal pathway between black tar heroin injection and abscess formation. The mechanisms by which black tar heroin contributes to vein loss and abscess formation must be further elucidated in order to develop actionable interventions for maintaining vein health and decreasing the abscess burden. Potential interventions include increased access to clean injection equipment and education, supervised injection facilities, opioid substitution therapy, and supply chain interventions targeting cutting agents.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policies and Practices in Peer-reviewed Biomedical Journals.

OBJECTIVE: We undertook this investigation to characterize conflict of interest (COI) policies of biomedical journals with respect to authors, peer-reviewers, and editors, and to ascertain what information about COI disclosures is publicly available. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 135 editors of peer-reviewed biomedical journals that publish original research. We chose an international selection of general and specialty medical journals that publish in English. Selection was based on journal impact factor, and the recommendations of experts in the field. We developed and pilot tested a 3-part web-based survey. The survey included questions about the presence of specific policies for authors, peer-reviewers, and editors, specific restrictions on authors, peer-reviewers, and editors based on COI, and the public availability of these disclosures. Editors were contacted a minimum of 3 times. RESULTS: The response rate for the survey was 91 (67%) of 135, and 85 (93%) of 91 journals reported having an author COI policy. Ten (11%) journals reported that they restrict author submissions based on COI (e.g., drug company authors' papers on their products are not accepted). While 77% report collecting COI information on all author submissions, only 57% publish all author disclosures. A minority of journals report having a specific policy on peer-reviewer 46% (42/91) or editor COI 40% (36/91); among these, 25% and 31% of journals state that they require recusal of peer-reviewers and editors if they report a COI. Only 3% of respondents publish COI disclosures of peer-reviewers, and 12% publish editor COI disclosures, while 11% and 24%, respectively, reported that this information is available upon request. CONCLUSION: Many more journals have a policy regarding COI for authors than they do for peer-reviewers or editors. Even author COI policies are variable, depending on the type of manuscript submitted. The COI information that is collected by journals is often not published; the extent to which such "secret disclosure" may impact the integrity of the journal or the published work is not known.

A test of knowledge about prostate cancer screening. Online pilot evaluation among Southern California Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Although the benefits of prostate cancer screening are uncertain and guidelines recommend that physicians share the screening decision with their patients, most U.S. men over age 50 are routinely screened, often without counseling. OBJECTIVE: To develop an instrument for assessing physicians' knowledge related to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations on prostate cancer screening. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy internists, family physicians, and general practitioners in the Los Angeles area who deliver primary care to adult men. MEASUREMENTS: We assessed knowledge related to prostate cancer screening (natural history, test characteristics, treatment effects, and guideline recommendations), beliefs about the net benefits of screening, and prostate cancer screening practices for men in different age groups, using an online survey. We constructed a knowledge scale having 15 multiple-choice items. RESULTS: Participants' mean knowledge score was 7.4 (range 3 to 12) of 15 (Cronbach's alpha=0.71). Higher knowledge scores were associated with less belief in a mortality benefit from prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing (r=-.49, P<.001). Participants could be categorized as low, age-selective, and high users of routine PSA screening. High users had lower knowledge scores than age-selective or low users, and they believed much more in mortality benefits from PSA screening. CONCLUSIONS: Based on its internal consistency and its correlations with measures of physicians' net beliefs and self-reported practices, the knowledge scale developed in this study holds promise for measuring the effects of professional education on prostate cancer screening. The scale deserves further evaluation in broader populations.