American Indian/Alaska Native men are less likely to receive prostate-specific antigen testing and digital rectal exams from primary care providers than White men: a secondary analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2012-2018.

PURPOSE: (1) Identify the proportion of primary care visits in which American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) men receive a prostate-specific antigen test (PSAT)and/or a digital rectal exam (DRE), (2) describe characteristics of primary care visits in which AI/AN receive PSA and/or DRE, and (3) identify whether AI/AN receive PSA and/or DRE less often than non-Hispanic White (nHW) men. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) during 2013-2016 and 2018 and the NAMCS Community Health Center (CHC) datasets from 2012-2015. Weighted bivariate and multivariable tests analyzed the data to account for the complex survey design. RESULTS: For AI/AN men, 1.67 per 100 visits (95% CI = 0-4.24) included a PSATs (or PSAT) and 0 visits included a DRE between 2013-2016 and 2018. The rate of PSA for non-AI/AN men was 9.35 per 100 visits (95% CI = 7.78-10.91) and 2.52 per 100 visits (95% CI = 1.61-3.42) for DRE. AI/AN men were significantly less likely to receive a PSA than nHW men (aOR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01-0.83). In CHCs, AI/AN men experienced 4.26 PSAT per 100 visits (95% CI = 0.96-7.57) compared to 5.00 PSAT per 100 visits (95% CI = 4.40-5.68) for non-AI/AN men. DRE rates for AI/AN men was 0.63 per 100 visits (95% CI = 0-1.61) compared to 1.05 per 100 (95% CI = 0.74-1.37) for non-AI/AN men. There was not a statistically significant disparity in the CHC data regarding PSA (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.42-1.98) or DRE (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.15-3.74), compared to nHW men. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed to better understand why providers may not use PSA and DRE with AI/AN men compared to nHW men.

Implementing smokeless tobacco instruction into medical student education: addressing the gap.

BACKGROUND: Despite the unique health and epidemiological aspects of smokeless tobacco use, medical education regarding this topic is virtually lacking. DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this study is to develop a comprehensive tobacco curriculum that includes smokeless tobacco education. A thorough review of the literature was carried out to develop includes 8 modules in basic and clinical sciences that are evaluated by pretest/posttest increases in knowledge as well as standardized patient encounters and process evaluation. EVALUATION: Pretest/posttest data indicate that students increased knowledge on specific smokeless tobacco questions. Students also scored well on interactions with standardized patients using the Tobacco Intervention Risk Factor Interview Scale, a validated instrument to assess medical students' tobacco counseling skills. Process evaluation data indicate that modules were generally well received. CONCLUSIONS: This Web-based, comprehensive curriculum-the only curriculum we are aware of treating the topic of smokeless tobacco use-appears to be effective and well received. Smokeless tobacco should be included in medical education.

Training and evaluating tobacco-specific standardized patient instructors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A comprehensive training program to develop tobacco-specific standardized patient instructors (SPIs) was implemented and evaluated at Wake Forest University. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were used to assess SPIs' experience with the training program and medical students' perceptions of the SPI-student interaction. Two standardized scales, used to assess student performance on counseling (Tobacco Intervention Risk Factor Interview Scale [TIRFIS]) and cultural competency (Tobacco Beliefs Management Scale-Tobacco Cultural Concerns Scale [TBMS-TCCS]), were tested for internal and interrater reliability and sensitivity to varied student performance. Costs of the program were measured. RESULTS: SPIs highly rated the content, organization, and presenters of the training program. Medical students positively evaluated their experience with the SPIs. The TIRFIS and TBMS-TCCS subscales demonstrated good internal reliability, and inconsistencies in ratings by different SPIs were minimal. In addition, a range of scores on both measures attest to the sensitivity of the instruments to assess variations in student performance. Significant start-up costs are associated with developing this training program, although costs decline when SPIs are retained long term. CONCLUSIONS: The SPI training program was effective in developing a cohort of knowledgeable and reliable SPIs to train medical students in ways to improve their tobacco intervention counseling skills. Retaining SPIs long term should be a primary goal of implementing a cost-effective, successful training program.

Reliability of a Smoking Cessation Risk Factor Interview Scale (SCRFIS) for use with standardized patient instructors.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the smoking cessation risk factor interview scale (SCRFIS). METHODS: Encounters from 16 patient instructors and 414 medical students were used for analyses: Cronbach's alpha and item-to-total correlations measured internal consistency; one-way analysis of variance evaluated comparability of scores across multiple raters, t-tests measured gender bias, and regression analyses compared student counseling skills across three curricula. RESULTS: The total scale was reliable, there was minimal gender bias, and student counseling skills remained relatively constant over time. Interviewing techniques, however, improved among students who participated in the curriculum that emphasized earliest patient contact. CONCLUSION: A preliminary assessment of the measurement adequacy of the SCRFIS suggests that this instrument is a reliable measure of medical student's counseling skills on smoking cessation and is sensitive to changes in curriculum that emphasize patient contact. The SCRFIS may be applied in undergraduate medical curriculum, but it is advisable to evaluate the psychometric properties of this scale when used as an assessment of student performance.

Tobacco intervention training: current efforts and gaps in US medical schools.

CONTEXT: Research has documented that US medical schools inadequately teach tobacco intervention skills. OBJECTIVE: To examine effective training methods for tobacco intervention in undergraduate medical education. DATA SOURCES: Using indexing terms related to tobacco intervention and medical education, we searched MEDLINE (1966-June 2002) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through issue 2, 2002). Reference lists of relevant articles were also read to identify additional articles. Because of their importance to tobacco intervention, we also reviewed Ockene and colleagues' tobacco education research and the tobacco treatment guidelines of the United States Public Health Service and the United States Preventive Services Task Force. STUDY SELECTION: All study designs that incorporated process or outcome evaluation of tobacco intervention educational methods for medical students were included in this review. Of an initial 1241 articles retrieved, 82 included medical students. Reviewing abstracts and references of these articles identified 13 pertinent studies. DATA EXTRACTION: Quality criteria for inclusion consisted of explicit evaluation of the educational methods used. Data extraction identified all evaluations and any problems in program implementation. DATA SYNTHESIS: Enhanced instructional methods (eg, the use of patient-centered counseling, standardized patient instructors, role playing, or a combination of these) are more effective for teaching tobacco intervention than are traditional didactic methods alone and can be effectively inserted into medical school curricula. CONCLUSIONS: Various educational methods have been used to train medical students in tobacco intervention. Nonetheless, gaps still exist within undergraduate medical education, including a lack of integration of tobacco dependence information throughout all 4 years of medical school curricula, specific training in smokeless tobacco intervention, tobacco intervention training that addresses cultural issues, and long-term studies showing that such training is retained.