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.

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.

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.