Perspectives of Community Partners Involved in an Academic Training to Address Clinicians' Implicit Bias.

BACKGROUND: Community-academic partnerships are increasingly used in interventions to address health care disparities. Little is known about motivations and perceptions of participating community members. OBJECTIVES: To elicit community members' perspectives of involvement in a community-academic partnership to address implicit bias in health care. METHODS: With our partnering community organizer, we conducted one-on-one semistructured interviews and a follow-up group interview with participating community members to solicit experiences about involvement in an National Institutes of Health-funded clinician training; responses were organized using content analysis. RESULTS: Community members revealed that their participation was motivated by trust in our community organizer; they derived personal pride from participation in clinician training; the power differential between community members and clinicians in the training environment needed to be levelled. Our community organizer noted that the benefits of community-academic partnerships propagate to the larger community via community members' experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Community members note trust, pride, and power as important elements in community-academic partnership.

Using Simulation-Based Learning with Standardized Patients (SP) in an Implicit Bias Mitigation Clinician Training Program.

Objectives: To describe the development and refinement of an implicit bias recognition and management training program for clinical trainees. Methods: In the context of an NIH-funded clinical trial to address healthcare disparities in hypertension management, research and education faculty at an academic medical center used a participatory action research approach to engage local community members to develop and refine a "knowledge, awareness, and skill-building" bias recognition and mitigation program. The program targeted medical residents and Doctor of Nursing Practice students. The content of the two-session training included: didactics about healthcare disparities, racism and implicit bias; implicit association test (IAT) administration to raise awareness of personal implicit bias; skill building for bias-mitigating communication; and case scenarios for skill practice in simulation-based encounters with standardized patients (SPs) from the local community. Results: The initial trial year enrolled n = 65 interprofessional participants. Community partners and SPs who engaged throughout the design and implementation process reported overall positive experiences, but SPs expressed need for greater faculty support during in-person debriefings following simulation encounters to balance power dynamics. Initial year trainee participants reported discomfort with intensive sequencing of in-person didactics, IATs, and SP simulations in each of the two training sessions. In response, authors refined the training program to separate didactic sessions from IAT administration and SP simulations, and to increase safe space, and trainee and SP empowerment. The final program includes more interactive discussions focused on identity, race and ethnicity, and strategies to address local health system challenges related to structural racism. Conclusion: It is possible to develop and implement a bias awareness and mitigation skills training program that uses simulation-based learning with SPs, and to engage with local community members to tailor the content to address the experience of local patient populations. Further research is needed to measure the success and impact of replicating this approach elsewhere.

Advance Care Planning for Spanish-Language Speakers: Patient, Family, and Interpreter Perspectives.

Language access barriers for individuals with limited-English proficiency are a challenge to advance care planning (ACP). Whether Spanish-language translations of ACP resources are broadly acceptable by US Spanish-language speakers from diverse countries is unclear. This ethnographic qualitative study ascertained challenges and facilitators to ACP with respect to Spanish-language translation of ACP resources. We conducted focus groups with a heterogeneous sample of 29 Spanish-speaking persons who had experience with ACP as a patient, family member, and/or medical interpreter. We conducted thematic analysis with axial coding. Themes include: (1). ACP translations are confusing; (2). ACP understanding is affected by country of origin; (3). ACP understanding is affected by local healthcare provider culture and practice; and (4). ACP needs to be normalized into local communities. ACP is both a cultural and clinical practice. Recommendations for increasing ACP uptake extend beyond language translation to acknowledging users' culture of origin and local healthcare culture.

Stakeholder-engaged process for refining the design of a clinical trial in home hospice.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials in home hospice settings are important to build the evidence base for practice, but balancing the burden and benefit of clinical trial conduct for clinicians, patients, and family caregivers is challenging. A stakeholder-engaged process can help inform and refine key aspects of home hospice clinical trials. The aim of this study was to describe a stakeholder-engaged process to refine, design, and implement aspects of an educational intervention trial in home hospice, including recommendations for refining intervention content and delivery, recruitment and enrollment strategies, and content and frequency of outcome measurement. METHODS: A panel of interprofessional (1 hospice administrator, 3 nurses, 2 physicians, 2 pharmacists) and 2 former family caregiver stakeholders was systematically selected and invited to participate based on expertise, representing 2 geographically distinct hospices who were participating in the clinical trial. Teleconferences followed a predetermined procedural sequence: 1. pre-meeting materials distribution and review; 2. pre-meeting email solicitation of concerns in response to materials; 3. teleconference with structured and guided discussion; and 4. documentation and distribution of minutes for accuracy review and future meeting guidance. Discussion topics were distinct for each panel meeting. Written reflections on the stakeholder engagement process were collected from panel members to further refine our process. RESULTS: Five initial biweekly teleconferences resulted in recommendations for recruitment strategy, enrollment process, measurement frequency, patient inclusion, and primary care physician notification of the patient's trial involvement. The panel continues to participate in quarterly teleconferences to review progress and unexpected questions and concerns. Panelist reflections reveal personal and professional benefit from participation. CONCLUSIONS: An interprofessional stakeholder process is feasible and invaluable for developing home hospice intervention studies, contributing to better science, successful trial implementation, and relevant, valid outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03972163 , Registered June 3, 2019.

COmmuNity-engaged SimULation Training for Blood Pressure Control (CONSULT-BP): A study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals have negative implicit biases toward minority and poor patients. Few communication skills interventions target implicit bias as a factor contributing to disparities in health outcomes. We report the protocol from the COmmuNity-engaged SimULation Training for Blood Pressure Control (CONSULT-BP), a trial evaluating a novel educational and training intervention targeting graduate medical and nursing trainees that is designed to mitigate the effects of implicit bias in clinical encounters. The CONSULT-BP intervention combines knowledge acquisition, bias awareness, and practice of bias mitigating skills in simulation-based communication encounters with racially/ethnically diverse standardized patients. The trial evaluates the effect of this 3-part program on patient BP outcomes, self-reported patient medication adherence, patient-reported quality of provider communication, and trainee bias awareness. METHODS: We are conducting a cluster randomized trial of the intervention among cohorts of internal medicine (IM), family medicine (FM), and nurse practitioner (NP) trainees at a single academic medical center. We are enrolling entire specialty cohorts of IM, FM, and NP trainees over a 3-year period, with each academic year constituting an intervention cycle. There are 3 cycles of implementation corresponding to 3 sequential academic years. Within each academic year, we randomize training times to 1 of 5 start dates using a stepped wedge design. The stepped wedge design compares outcomes within training clusters before and after the intervention, as well as across exposed and unexposed clusters. Primary outcome of blood pressure control is measured at the patient-level for patients clustered within trainees. Eligible patients for outcomes analysis are: English-speaking; non-White racial/ethnic minority; Medicaid recipient (regardless of race/ethnicity); hypertension; not have pregnancy, dementia, schizophrenia, bipolar illness, or other serious comorbidities that would interfere with hypertension self-control; not enrolled in hospice. Secondary outcomes include trainee bias awareness. A unique feature of this trial is the engagement of academic and community stakeholders to design, pilot test and implement a training program addressing healthcare. DISCUSSION: Equipping clinicians with skills to mitigate implicit bias in clinical encounters is crucial to addressing persistent disparities in healthcare outcomes. Our novel, integrated approach may improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03375918. PROTOCOL VERSION: 1.0 (November 10, 2020).