Study protocol: A cross-sectional survey of clinicians to identify barriers to clinical practice guideline implementation in the assessment and treatment of persistent tic disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Eight members of the International Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Society Tic and Tourette Syndrome Study Group formed a subcommittee to discuss further barriers to practice guideline implementation. Based on expert opinion and literature review, the consensus was that practice variations continue to be quite broad and that many barriers in different clinical settings might negatively influence the adoption of the American Academy of Neurology and the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome published guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1) To identify how clinical practices diverge from the existing American Academy of Neurology and European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome guidelines, and 2) to identify categories of barriers leading to these clinical care gaps. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This article presents the methodology of a planned cross-sectional survey amongst healthcare professionals routinely involved in the clinical care of patients with persistent tic disorders, aimed at 1) identifying how practices diverge from the published guidelines; and 2) identifying categories of barriers leading to these clinical care gaps. Purposeful sampling methods are used to identify and recruit critical persistent tic disorders stakeholders. The analysis will use descriptive statistics.

The status of neurology fellowships in the United States: clinical needs, educational barriers, and future outlooks.

The need for subspecialty-trained neurologists is growing in parallel with increasing disease burden. However, despite the immense burden of neurological diseases, like headache and neurodegenerative disorders, recruitment into these subspecialties remains insufficient in the United States. In this manuscript, a group of educators from the American Academy of Neurology's A.B. Baker Section on Neurological Education sought to review and discuss the current landscape of neurology fellowships in the United States, the factors driving fellowship recruitment and the educational barriers. Moreover, suggestions to potentially improve recruitment for under-selected fellowships, which can contribute towards an alignment between neurological education and neurological needs, and future educational scenarios are discussed.

Current state of educational compensation in academic neurology: Results of a US national survey.

In the current medical climate, medical education is at risk of being de-emphasized, leading to less financial support and compensation for faculty. A rise in compensation plans that reward clinical or research productivity fails to incentivize and threatens to erode the educational missions of our academic institutions. Aligning compensation with the all-encompassing mission of academic centers can lead to increased faculty well-being, clinical productivity, and scholarship. An anonymous survey developed by members of the A.B. Baker Section on Neurologic Education was sent to the 133 chairs of neurology to assess the type of compensation faculty receive for teaching efforts. Seventy responses were received, with 59 being from chairs. Key results include the following: 36% of departments offered direct compensation; 36% did not; residency program directors received the most salary support at 36.5% full-time equivalent; and administrative roles had greatest weight in determining academic compensation. We believe a more effective, transparent system of recording and rewarding faculty for their educational efforts would encourage faculty to teach, streamline promotions for clinical educators, and strengthen undergraduate and graduate education in neurology.