US Medical-Legal Partnerships to Address Health-Harming Legal Needs: Closing the Health Injustice Gap.

The medical-legal partnership (MLP) model is emerging across the USA as a powerful tool to address the adverse social conditions underlying health injustice. MLPs embed legal experts into healthcare teams to address health-harming legal needs with civil legal remedies. We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed articles published between 2007 and 2022 to characterize the structure and impacts of US MLPs on patients, providers, and healthcare systems. We found that MLPs largely serve vulnerable patient populations by integrating legal experts into community-based clinical settings or children's hospitals, although patient populations and settings varied widely. In most models, healthcare providers were trained to screen patients for legal needs and refer them to legal experts. MLPs provided a wide range of services, such as assistance accessing public benefits (e.g., Social Security, Medicaid, cash assistance) and legal representation for immigration and family law matters. Patients and their families also benefited from increased knowledge about legal rights and systems. Though the evidence base remains nascent, available studies show MLPs to be associated with greater access to care, fewer hospitalizations, and improved physical and mental health outcomes. Medical and legal providers who were engaged in MLPs reported interdisciplinary learning, and healthcare systems often experienced high returns on investment through cost savings and increased Medicaid reimbursement. Many MLPs also conducted advocacy and education to effect broader policy changes related to population health and social needs. To optimize the MLP model, more rigorous research, systematic implementation practices, evaluation metrics, and sustainable funding mechanisms are recommended. Broader integration of MLPs into healthcare systems could help address root causes of health inequity among historically marginalized populations in the USA.

Exploring Experiences of Traumatic Microaggressions Toward Surgeons and Surgical Residents.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have suggested that experiences of gender and racial discrimination are widespread among surgeons and surgical residents. This study examines the relationship between experienced microaggressions and traumatic stress. METHODS: A one-time, deidentified survey was distributed over email to academic surgical societies. The survey consisted of 35 items including questions on prevalence of microaggressions, perceived job impacts as well as a shortened version of the Trauma Symptoms of Discrimination Scale. Chi-square tests and an independence test for trends were utilized to determine significance. RESULTS: We collected data from 130 participants with majority (81%) having experienced microaggressions in the workplace. On measures of worry (P < 0.001), avoidance (P = 0.012), anxiety (P = 0.004), and trouble relaxing (P = 0.002), racial/ethnic minority surgeons and trainees demonstrated significantly higher scores. With perceived job impacts, significant agreement was seen with occurrences of working harder to prove competence (P = 0.005), gaining patient confidence (P < 0.001), reduced career satisfaction (P = 0.011), work-related negative talk (P = 0.018), and burnout at work due to microaggressions (P = 0.019). Among participants who underwent behavioral modifications, female surgeons were more likely to change their nonverbal communication styles (P < 0.001) and spend more time with patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Experiences of microaggressions are associated with increased anxiety-related trauma symptoms in racial/ethnic minority surgeons and surgical trainees. Additionally, these experiences of microaggression can influence job satisfaction, burnout, career perceptions and workplace behaviors. As the field of surgery becomes more diverse, this study contributes to growing awareness of the role of implicit discrimination in the attrition and retention of racial/ethnic minority surgeons and female surgeons.

Advancing Science to Prevent Firearm Violence in Communities: A Process for Harmonizing Studies to Develop Research Infrastructure.

The Community Firearm Violence Prevention Network (CFVP Network), funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), supports a network of research projects that develop and test interventions through collaborations with community partners to prevent firearm violence, injury, and mortality. The CFVP Network presents a unique opportunity to accelerate the science of preventing firearm injuries. The data harmonization workgroup of the CFVP Network led the process of aligning studies across the three unique inaugural network projects, with particular attention to how the CFVP Network could address current gaps in the science. The goal of the data harmonization workgroup was to align study measures, assessment timelines, and data management and archival processes across projects to enable robust cross-project analyses that accelerate the science of preventing firearm injuries. To accomplish this goal, the workgroup established the infrastructure to facilitate cross-project data collection, data sharing and archiving, and analyses. Among the three inaugural network projects, the workgroup's process resulted in harmonizing two assessment timepoints (baseline and one year post-implementation) and 60 constructs (with 31 identical standardized constructs). These harmonized products provide opportunities for novel analyses across the network projects. We expect that the harmonized study infrastructure developed through this process will catalyze future research focused on preventing firearm injury, including and extending beyond CFVP Network projects. The CFVP data harmonization workgroup's process can serve as a model for future networks that seek to build the science in a particular area.

And Miles to Go Before We Sleep: EAST Diversity and Inclusivity Progress and Remaining Challenges.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the diversity, equity, and inclusion landscape in academic trauma surgery and the EAST organization. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In 2019, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) surveyed its members on equity and inclusion in the #EAST4ALL survey and assessed leadership representation. We hypothesized that women and surgeons of color (SOC) are underrepresented as EAST members and leaders. METHODS: Survey responses were analyzed post-hoc for representation of females and SOC in academic appointments and leadership, EAST committees, and the EAST board, and compared to the overall respondent cohort. EAST membership and board demographics were compared to demographic data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. RESULTS: Of 306 respondents, 37.4% identified as female and 23.5% as SOC. There were no significant differences in female and SOC representation in academic appointments and EAST committees compared to their male and white counterparts. In academic leadership, females were underrepresented ( P < 0.0001), whereas SOC were not ( P = 0.08). Both females and SOC were underrepresented in EAST board membership ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.043, respectively). Of EAST's 33 presidents, 3 have been white women (9%), 2 have been Black, non-African American men (6%), and 28 (85%) have been white men. When compared to 2017 AAMC data, women are well-represented in EAST's 2020 membership ( P < 0.0001) and proportionally represented on EAST's 2019-2020 board ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The #EAST4ALL survey suggests that women and SOC may be underrepresented as leaders in academic trauma surgery. However, lack of high-quality demographic data makes evaluating representation of structurally marginalized groups challenging. National trauma organizations should elicit data from their members to re-assess and promote the diversity landscape in trauma surgery.

Review Paper on Penetrating Brain Injury: Ethical Quandaries in the Trauma Bay and Beyond.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to review the ethical and multidisciplinary clinical challenges facing trauma surgeons when resuscitating patients presenting with penetrating brain injury (PBI) and multicavitary trauma. BACKGROUND: While there is a significant gap in the literature on managing PBI in patients presenting with multisystem trauma, recent data demonstrate that resuscitation and prognostic features for such patients remains poorly described, with trauma guidelines out of date in this field. METHODS: We reviewed a combination of recent multidisciplinary evidence-informed guidelines for PBI and coupled this with expert opinion from trauma, neurosurgery, neurocritical care, pediatric and transplant surgery, surgical ethics and importantly our community partners. RESULTS: Traditional prognostic signs utilized in traumatic brain injury may not be applicable to PBI with a multidisciplinary team approach suggested on a case-by-case basis. Even with no role for neurosurgical intervention, neurocritical care, and neurointerventional support may be warranted, in parallel to multicavitary operative intervention. Special considerations should be afforded for pediatric PBI. Ethical considerations center on providing the patient with the best chance of survival. Consideration of organ donation should be considered as part of the continuum of patient, proxy and family-centric support and care. Community input is crucial in guiding decision making or protocol establishment on an institutional level. CONCLUSIONS: Support of the patient after multicavitary PBI can be complex and is best addressed in a multidisciplinary fashion with extensive community involvement.

Nationwide Management of Trauma in Child Abuse: Exploring the Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities.

OBJECTIVE: Child abuse is a major cause of childhood injury, morbidity, and death. There is a paucity of data on the practice of abuse interventions among this vulnerable population. The aim of our study was to identify the factors associated with interventions for child abuse on a national scale. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 2017 to 2018 American College of Surgeons (ACS) Pediatric Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP). All children presenting with suspected/confirmed child abuse and an abuse report filed were included. Patients with missing information regarding abuse interventions were excluded. Outcomes were abuse investigations initiated among those with abuse reports, and change of caregiver at discharge among survivors with an investigation initiated. Multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 7774 child abuse victims with an abuse report were identified. The mean age was 5±5 years, 4221 (54%) patients were White, 2297 (30%) Black, 1543 (20%) Hispanic, and 5298 (68%) had government insurance. The most common mechanism was blunt (63%), followed by burns (10%) and penetrating (10%). The median Injury Severity Score was 5 (1-12). The most common form of abuse was physical (92%), followed by neglect (6%), sexual (3%), and psychological (0.1%). The most common perpetrator of abuse was a care provider/teacher (49.5%), followed by a member of the immediate family (30.5%), or a member of the extended/step/foster family (20.0%). Overall, 6377 (82%) abuse investigations were initiated for those with abuse reports. Of these, 1967 (33%) resulted in a change of caregiver. Black children were more likely to have abuse investigated, and Black and Hispanic children were more likely to experience change of caregiver after investigations, while privately insured children were less likely to experience both. CONCLUSIONS: Significant racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the nationwide management of child abuse. Further studies are strongly warranted to understand contributing factors and possible strategies to address them. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-therapeutic/care management.

Demographic and Regional Factors Associated With Reporting Homicides of Transgender People in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The American Medical Association recently declared homicides of transgender individuals an epidemic. However, transgender homicide victims are often classified as nontransgender. Our objective was to describe existing data and coding of trans (i.e., transgender) victims and to examine the risk factors for homicides of trans people relative to nontrans people across the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Violent Death Reporting System for the years 2003-2018 identified victims defined as transgender either through the "transgender" variable or narrative reports. Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression models were run to compare the demographics of trans victims to those not identified as trans. RESULTS: Of the 147 transgender victims identified, 14.4% were incorrectly coded as nontrans despite clear indication of trans status in the narrative description, and 6% were coded as hate crimes. Relative to nontrans victims, trans victims were more frequently Black (54.4% versus 40.7%, P = 0.001), had a mental health condition (26.5% versus 11.3%, P < 0.001), or reported being a sex worker (9.5% versus 0.2%, P < 0.001). There were disproportionately few homicides of transgender people in the South (13.6% of trans victims versus 29.1% of nontrans victims, P < 0.001). Conversely, the West and Midwest accounted for a higher-than-expected proportion of trans victims relative to nontrans victims (23.1% of trans victims versus 16.2% of nontrans victims, P = 0.03; 24.5% of trans victims versus 16.8% of nontrans victims, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Though the murder of transgender individuals is a known public health crisis, inconsistencies still exist in the assessment and reporting of transgender status. Further, these individuals were more likely to have multiple distinct vulnerabilities. These findings provide important information for injury and violence prevention researchers to improve reporting of transgender status in the medical record and local trauma registries.

Fair and equitable subject selection in concurrent COVID-19 clinical trials.

Clinical trials emerged in rapid succession as the COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented need for life-saving therapies. Fair and equitable subject selection in clinical trials offering investigational therapies ought to be an urgent moral concern. Subject selection determines the distribution of risks and benefits, and impacts the applicability of the study results for the larger population. While Research Ethics Committees monitor fair subject selection within each trial, no standard oversight exists for subject selection across multiple trials for the same disease. Drawing on the experience of multiple clinical trials at a single academic medical centre in the USA, we posit that concurrent COVID-19 trials are liable to unfair and inequitable subject selection on account of scientific uncertainty, lack of transparency, scarcity and, lastly, structural barriers to equity compounded by implicit bias. To address the critical gap in the current literature and international regulation, we propose new ethical guidelines for research design and conduct that bolsters fair and equitable subject selection. Although the proposed guidelines are tailored to the research design and protocol of concurrent trials in the COVID-19 pandemic, they may have broader relevance to single COVID-19 trials.

Cerebrovascular Complications in Early Survivors of Civilian Penetrating Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the presence of cerebrovascular injuries in a large sample of civilian penetrating brain injury (PBI) patients, determining the prevalence, radiographic characteristics, and impact on short-term outcome. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with PBI admitted to our institution over a 2-year period. Computed tomography head scans, computer tomography angiograms and venograms of the intracranial vessels were evaluated to determine the wound trajectory, intracranial injury characteristics, and presence of arterial (AI) and venous sinus (VSI) injuries. Demographics, clinical presentation, and treatment were also reviewed. Discharge disposition was used as surrogate of short-term outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included in the study. The mechanism of injury was gunshot wounds in 71 patients and stab wound in one. Forty-one of the 72 patients (60%) had at least one vascular injury. Twenty-six out of 72 patients suffered an AI (36%), mostly pseudoaneurysms and occlusions, involving the anterior and middle cerebral arteries. Of the 72 patients included, 45 had dedicated computed tomography venograms, and of those 22 had VSI (49%), mainly manifesting as superior sagittal sinus occlusion. In a multivariable regression model, intraventricular hemorrhage at presentation was associated with AI (OR 9.9, p = 0.004). The same was not true for VSI. CONCLUSION: Acute traumatic cerebrovascular injury is a prevalent complication in civilian PBI, frequently involving both the arterial and venous sinus systems. Although some radiographic features might be associated with presence of vascular injury, assessment of the intracranial vasculature in the acute phase of all PBI is essential for early diagnosis. Treatment of vascular injury remains variable depending on local practice.

Perceptions of Equity and Inclusion in Acute Care Surgery: From the #EAST4ALL Survey.

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to characterize equity and inclusion in acute care surgery (ACS) with a survey to examine the demographics of ACS surgeons, the exclusionary or biased behaviors they witnessed and experienced, and where those behaviors happen. A major initiative of the Equity, Quality, and Inclusion in Trauma Surgery Practice Ad Hoc Task Force of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma was to characterize equity and inclusion in ACS. To do so, a survey was created with the above objectives. METHODS: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods anonymous online survey was sent to all EAST members. Closed-ended questions are reported as percentages with a cutoff of α = 0.05 for significance. Quantitative results were analyzed focusing on mistreatment and bias. RESULTS: Most respondents identified as white, non-Hispanic and male. In the past 12 months, 57.5% of females witnessed or experienced sexual harassment, whereas 48.6% of surgeons of color witnessed or experienced racial/ethnic discrimination. Sexual harassment, racial/ethnic prejudice, or discrimination based on sexual orientation/sex identity was more frequent in the workplace than at academic conferences or in ACS. Females were more likely than males to report unfair treatment due to age, appearance or sex in the workplace and ACS (P ≤ 0.002). Surgeons of color were more likely than white, non-Hispanics to report unfair treatment in the workplace and ACS due to race/ethnicity (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first survey of ACS surgeons on equity and inclusion. Perceptions of bias are prevalent. Minorities reported more inequity than their white male counterparts. Behavior in the workplace was worse than at academic conferences or ACS. Ensuring equity and inclusion may help ACS attract and retain the best and brightest without fear of unfair treatment.