Medical students' perception of their 'distance travelled' in medical school applications.

INTRODUCTION: Within medical school's holistic review of applicants includes a review of their distance travelled to get to this point in their education. The AAMC defines distance travelled (DT) as, 'any obstacles or hardships you've overcome to get to this point in your education or any life challenges you've faced and conquered'. What medical students consider as their distance travelled has not been explored. The authors sought to identify the factors medical students perceive are important for medical school admissions to consider when assessing someone's 'distance travelled' by asking current medical students to share their DT experiences along with the barriers and facilitators they encountered on their medical school journey. METHODS: The authors conducted semi-structured interviews with US medical students through purposeful sampling methods. The social-ecological model framework was used to develop questions to elicit participants' experiences that contributed to their distance travelled. Interviews were conducted in 2021 and ranged from 60-75 minutes. Transcribed interviews were qualitatively analysed using interpretive description. RESULTS: A total of 31 medical students from seven medical schools were included in the study. Overall, participants defined distance travelled as an applicant's hardships (e.g. being the primary caregiver for a family member) and privileges (e.g. having physician parents) they experienced. Three major themes were identified: (1) individual-level characteristics and factors, (2) interpersonal relationships and (3) aspects of the participants' community and society. DISCUSSION: Our findings show that medical school applicants considered DT to be a valuable component of a holistic medical school admission process. Participants' experiences of DT were varied and complex. Our research suggests that admissions teams for medical schools should incorporate more comprehensive recruitment practices and inclusive methodological frameworks to accurately capture the diversity of identities and experiences of medical school applicants and to consider the factors that shape their journey to medical schools.

Examining National Guideline Changes Association With Hemithyroidectomy Rates by Surgeon Volume.

INTRODUCTION: The 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines established that hemithyroidectomy (HT) is an appropriate treatment for patients with low-risk thyroid cancer. HT rates increased since the ATA guidelines were released; however, the relationship between surgeon volume and the initial extent of surgery has not been established. METHODS: A statewide database was used to identify patients with thyroid cancer who underwent initial thyroidectomy from 2013 to 2020. High-volume thyroid surgeons were defined as those who performed >25 thyroid procedures per year. A mixed-effect logistic model was used to compare low- and high-volume surgeons' initial extent of surgery pre-2015 and post-2015 ATA guidelines. Descriptive statistics were used to describe other surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The analysis included 3199 patients with thyroid cancer who underwent initial thyroidectomy. Twenty-four surgeons (6%) were considered high-volume; they performed 48% (n = 1349) of the operations. After the 2015 ATA guidelines were released, the rate of HT increased significantly for low- (23% to 28%, P = 0.042) but not high-volume (19% to 23%, P = 0.149) surgeons. Low-volume surgeons had significantly higher rates of readmission (P = 0.008), re-operation (P = 0.030), complications (P < 0.001), and emergency room visits (P = 0.002) throughout the entire study period. CONCLUSIONS: The publication of the 2015 ATA guidelines was associated with a significant increase in HT rates, primarily in low-volume thyroid surgeons. While low-volume surgeons began performing more HTs, they continued to have higher rates of readmission, reoperations, complications, and emergency room visits than high-volume surgeons.

Patient Preferences and Satisfaction With Decisions in Stage-III Melanoma: A Mixed Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid accumulation of data in surgical and medical oncology has changed the treatment landscape for patients with stage-III melanoma, introducing options for active surveillance and adjuvant systemic therapy; however, these options have increased the complexity of decision making. METHODS: We conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study consisting of surveys and semistructured interviews among patients diagnosed with stage-III melanoma at a single institution from August 2019 to December 2021. The survey included the validated 30-point satisfaction with decision scale (SWD). The interview guide was developed using a shared decision-making framework. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants completed the survey (response rate 40%) and 17 were interviewed. In the survey, 69% of participants reported receiving a recommendation for active surveillance and 23% received a recommendation for adjuvant systemic therapy. Overall SWD for treatment of the lymph node basin and adjuvant systemic therapy was high at 27.94 and 26.21 out of 30, respectively. In the interviews, participants stressed the importance of the physician's recommendation as well as the desire to minimize intervention and avoid potential side effects in their decisions. However, they demonstrated persistent knowledge gaps in their understanding of the treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: Like other cancer types where the option for active surveillance exists, the physician's recommendation is influential in shaping decisions for patients with stage-III melanoma. Physicians can improve shared decision making in this complex treatment landscape through improved multidisciplinary collaboration and mechanisms for ensuring patients' understanding of the treatment options.

Surgeon Perspectives on Determinants of Same-Day Mastectomy: A Roadmap for Implementing Change.

BACKGROUND: Same-day discharge after mastectomy without immediate reconstruction (MwoR) has been shown to be safe, with improved patient satisfaction when compared with patients discharged 1 or more days after surgery. Nevertheless, only 16% of patients undergoing MwoR in Michigan are discharged on the day of surgery, with significant variation between facilities (3-88%). Our objective was to explore determinants of same-day discharge and offer strategies for broader implementation of this practice. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with surgeons performing MwoR across the state of Michigan. Recruitment utilized purposeful and snowball sampling methods. The Tailored Implementation in Chronic Disease (TICD) framework was used to inform the creation of the interview guide. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using directed content analysis guided by the TICD framework. Salient determinants were organized into patient, provider, and system-level factors. RESULTS: Participants (n = 26) included general surgeons, breast surgeons, and surgical oncologists. Most surgeons (n = 18, 69%) reported that they discharged fewer than 60% of patients the same day after MwoR. The most common barriers included patient knowledge at the patient level; awareness of evidence, surgeon dogma, and peer influence at the provider level; and team processes and operating room logistics at the system level. CONCLUSION: We identified surgeon-defined determinants of same-day discharge after MwoR. For the identified barriers, potential implementation strategies could include incorporation of preoperative drain teachings for patients, utilizing consensus statements and opinion leaders to disseminate evidence supporting same-day mastectomies, and conducting workshops with relevant stakeholders to establish consistent facility practice patterns among surgical teams.

Review of Cancer-Specific Quality Measures Promoting the Avoidance of Low-Value Care.

BACKGROUND: With rising healthcare costs and campaigns aimed at avoiding low-value care, reducing cancer overtreatment has emerged as an important measure of cancer care quality. The extent to which avoidance of low-value care has been incorporated in cancer-specific quality measures is unknown. We aimed to identify and characterize cancer quality measures that promote the avoidance of low-value care, and identify gaps that may guide future measure development. METHODS: We systematically identified cancer-specific quality measures from leading quality measure organizations [e.g., National Quality Forum (NQF), National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC)]. We reviewed measures promoting the avoidance of low-value cancer care and subclassified them into disease site- or non-disease site-specific categories and the phase of care they targeted. RESULTS: We reviewed 313 quality measures from six organizations. Of these, 18% (n = 55) focused on avoidance of low-value care. Quality measures focused on end-of-life care were most likely to focus on low-value care [n = 13 (50%)], followed by breast [n = 12 (18%)], lung [n = 9 (31%)], colon [n = 8 (20%)], prostate [n = 5 (38%)], general cancer care [n = 4 (3%)], symptoms and toxicities [n = 2 (40%)], and palliative cancer care [n = 2 (11%)] measures. The phases of care quality measures targeted included low-value screening [n = 5 (9%)], diagnostic testing and staging [n = 7 (13%)], treatment [n = 19 (34%)], surveillance [n = 6 (11%)], and clinical outcomes [n = 18 (33%)]. All categories had a treatment-specific quality measure, but no category had a representative measure for every phase of care. DISCUSSION: A minority of cancer quality measures are aimed at avoiding low-value care, and multiple evidence-based recommendations targeting low-value care have not been incorporated.