'Walking together': How relationships shape physicians' clinical reasoning.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical reasoning literature has increasingly considered context as an important influence on physicians' thinking. Physicians' relationships with patients, and their ongoing efforts to maintain these relationships, are important influences on how clinical reasoning is contextualised. The authors sought to understand how physicians' relationships with patients shaped their clinical reasoning. METHODS: Drawing from constructivist grounded theory, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians. Participants were asked to reflect on recent challenging clinical experiences, and probing questions were used to explore how participants attended to or leveraged relationships in conjunction with their clinical reasoning. Using constant comparison, three investigators coded transcripts, organising the data into codes and conceptual categories. The research team drew from these codes and categories to develop theory about the phenomenon of interest. RESULTS: The authors interviewed 15 primary care physicians with a range of experience in practice and identified patient agency as a central influence on participants' clinical reasoning. Participants drew from and managed relationships with patients while attending to patients' agency in three ways. First, participants described how contextualised illness constructions enabled them to individualise their approaches to diagnosis and management. Second, participants managed tensions between enacting their typical approaches to clinical problems and adapting their approaches to foster ongoing relationships with patients. Finally, participants attended to relationships with patients' caregivers, seeing these individuals' contributions as important influences on how their clinical reasoning could be enacted within patients' unique social contexts. CONCLUSION: Clinical reasoning is influenced in important ways by physicians' efforts to both draw from, and maintain, their relationships with patients and patients' caregivers. Such efforts create tensions between their professional standards of care and their orientations toward patient-centredness. These influences of relationships on physicians' clinical reasoning have important implications for training and clinical practice.

'Yourself in all your forms': A grounded theory exploration of identity safety in medical students.

INTRODUCTION: Identity threats, such as stereotype threat and microaggressions, impair learning and erode well-being. In contrast to identity threat, less is known about how learners experience feelings of safety regarding their identity. This exploratory study aims to develop a theory of identity safety in the clinical learning environment. METHODS: This multi-institutional, qualitative interview study was informed by constructivist grounded theory and critical pedagogy. Participants were clinical students at three public medical schools in the United States in 2022. Investigators purposively sampled participants for interviews based on their responses to an 11-item survey with an open-ended question soliciting students' personal identities and responses to both the racial/ethnic and gender Stereotype Vulnerability Scales. The investigators interviewed, coded, constantly compared and continued sampling until the codes could be developed into categories, then concepts and finally into a theory. The team engaged in critical reflexivity throughout the analytic process to enrich data interpretations. RESULTS: Sixteen diverse students were interviewed. We organised their identity-salient experiences into identity threat, threat mitigation and identity safety. Participants experienced identity threat through unwelcoming learning environments, feeling compelled to change their behaviour in inauthentic ways or sociopolitical threat. Threat mitigation occurred when a participant or supervisor intervened against an identity threat, dampening but not eliminating the threat impact. Participants characterised identity safety as the ability to exist as their authentic selves without feeling the need to monitor how others perceive their identities. Identity safety manifested when participants demonstrated agency to leverage their identities for patient care, when others upheld their personhood and saw them as unique individuals and when they felt they belonged in the learning environment. DISCUSSION: Attending to identity safety may lead to educational practices that sustain and leverage team members' diverse identities. Identity safety and threat mitigation may work together to combat identity threats in the learning environment.

Professional identity struggle and ideology: A qualitative study of residents' experiences.

INTRODUCTION: To enter a profession is to take on a new identity. Professional identity formation can be difficult, with medical learners struggling to adopt professional norms. The role of ideology in medical socialisation may offer insight into these tensions experienced by medical learners. Ideology is the system of ideas and representations that dominates the minds of individuals or social groups and calls individuals into certain ways of being and acting in the world. In this study, we use the concept of ideology to explore residents' experiences with identity struggle during residency. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative exploration of residents in three specialties at three academic institutions in the United States. Participants engaged in a 1.5-hour session involving a rich picture drawing and one-on-one interview. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed iteratively, with developing themes compared concurrently to newly collected data. We met regularly to develop a theoretical framework to explain findings. RESULTS: We identified three ways that ideology contributed to residents' identity struggle. First was the intensity of work and perceived expectations of perfectionism. Second were tensions between the developing professional identity and pre-existing personal identities. Many residents perceived messages regarding the subjugation of personal identities, including the feeling that being more than physicians was impossible. Third were instances where the imagined professional identity clashed with the reality of medical practice. Many residents described how their ideals misaligned with normative professional ideals, constraining their ability to align their practice and ideals. CONCLUSION: This study uncovers an ideology that shapes residents' developing professional identity-an ideology that creates struggle as it calls them in impossible, competing or even contradictory ways. As we uncover the hidden ideology of medicine, learners, educators and institutions can play a meaningful role in supporting identity development in medical learners through dismantling and rebuilding its damaging elements.

Who's on your team? Specialty identity and inter-physician conflict during admissions.

PURPOSE: Despite the implementation of professionalism curricula and standardised communication tools, inter-physician conflict persists. In particular, the interface between emergency medicine (EM) and internal medicine (IM) has long been recognised as a source of conflict. The social nuances of this conflict remain underexplored, limiting educators' ability to comprehensively address these issues in the clinical learning environment. Thus, the authors explored EM and IM physicians' experiences with negotiating hospital admissions to better understand the social dynamics that contribute to inter-physician conflict and provide foundational guidance for communication best practices. METHODS: Using a constructivist grounded theory (CGT) approach, the authors conducted 18 semi-structured interviews between June and October 2020 with EM and IM physicians involved in conversations regarding admissions (CRAs). They asked participants to describe the social exchanges that influenced these conversations and to reflect on their experiences with inter-physician conflict. Data collection and analysis occurred iteratively. The relationships between the codes were discussed by the research team with the goal of developing conceptual connections between the emergent themes. RESULTS: Participants described how their approaches to CRAs were shaped by their specialty identity, and how allegiance to members of their group contributed to interpersonal conflict. This conflict was further promoted by a mutual sense of disempowerment within the organisation, misaligned expectations, and a desire to promote their group's prerogatives. Conflict was mitigated when patient care experiences fostered cross-specialty team formation and collaboration that dissolved traditional group boundaries. CONCLUSIONS: Conflict between EM and IM physicians during CRAs was primed by participants' specialty identities, their power struggles within the broader organisation, and their sense of duty to their own specialty. However, formation of collaborative inter-specialty physician teams and expansion of identity to include colleagues from other specialties can mitigate inter-physician conflict.

Skeptical self-regulation: Resident experiences of uncertainty about uncertainty.

OBJECTIVES: Managing uncertainty is central to expert practice, yet how novice trainees navigate these moments is likely different than what has been described by experienced clinicians. Exploring trainees' experiences with uncertainty could therefore help explicate the unique cues that they attend to, how they appraise their comfort in these moments and how they enact responses within the affordances of their training environment. METHODS: Informed by constructivist grounded theory, we explored how novice emergency medicine trainees experienced and managed clinical uncertainty in practice. We used a critical incident technique to prompt participants to reflect on experiences with uncertainty immediately following a clinical shift, exploring the cues they attended to and the approaches they used to navigate these moments. Two investigators coded line-by-line using constant comparison, organising the data into focused codes. The research team discussed the relationships between these codes and developed a set of themes that supported our efforts to theorise about the phenomenon. RESULTS: We enrolled 13 trainees in their first two years of postgraduate training across two institutions. They expressed uncertainty about the root causes of the patient problems they were facing and the potential management steps to take, but also expressed a pervasive sense of uncertainty about their own abilities and their appraisals of the situation. This, in turn, led to challenges with selecting, interpreting and using the cues in their environment effectively. Participants invoked several approaches to combat this sense of uncertainty about themselves, rehearsing steps before a clinical encounter, checking their interpretations with others and implicitly calibrating their appraisals to those of more experienced team members. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees' struggles with the legitimacy of their interpretations impact their experiences with uncertainty. Recognising these ongoing struggles may enable supervisors and other team members to provide more effective scaffolding, validation and calibration of clinical judgments and patient management.

Warning bells: How clinicians leverage their discomfort to manage moments of uncertainty.

OBJECTIVES: It remains unclear how medical educators can more effectively bridge the gap between trainees' intolerance of uncertainty and the tolerance that experienced physicians demonstrate in practice. Exploring how experienced clinicians experience, appraise and respond to discomfort arising from uncertainty could provide new insights regarding the kinds of behaviours we are trying to help trainees achieve. METHODS: We used a constructivist grounded theory approach to explore how emergency medicine faculty experienced, managed and responded to discomfort in settings of uncertainty. Using a critical incident technique, we asked participants to describe case-based experiences of uncertainty immediately following a clinical shift. We used probing questions to explore cognitive, emotional and somatic manifestations of discomfort, how participants had appraised and responded to these cues, and how they had used available resources to act in these moments of uncertainty. Two investigators coded the data line by line using constant comparative analysis and organised transcripts into focused codes. The entire research team discussed relationships between codes and categories, and developed a conceptual framework that reflected the possible relationships between themes. RESULTS: Participants identified varying levels of discomfort in their case descriptions. They described multiple cues alerting them to problems that were evolving in unexpected ways or problems with aspects of management that were beyond their abilities. Discomfort served as a trigger for participants to monitor a situation with greater attention and to proceed more intentionally. It also served as a prompt for participants to think deliberately about the types of human and material resources they might call upon strategically to manage these uncertain situations. CONCLUSIONS: Discomfort served as a dynamic means to manage and respond to uncertainty. To be 'tolerant' of uncertainty thus requires clinicians to embrace discomfort as a powerful tool with which to grapple with the complex problems pervasive in clinical practice.

Generational 'othering': The myth of the Millennial learner.

CONTEXT: The health professions education (HPE) literature is replete with recommendations for how educators should adapt practices to the needs of generations of learners using generation theory to bridge perceived differences between learners and educators. Yet the evidence supporting the application of generation theory in HPE has not been critically examined. If unsubstantiated, these applications may perpetuate biases towards learners they are intended to support. METHODS: This paper critically reviews generation theory in the HPE literature, with particular focus on recent recommendations regarding "Millennial" learners. We used Google Scholar, MEDLINE, EBSCO, JSTOR and PsycINFO to search for articles pertaining to the origins and uses of generation theory within and outside HPE. This synthesis is presented as a preliminary understanding of how ideas of generation theory arose and permeated the HPE literature, and explores the effects of generation theory on education practices. RESULTS: In the HPE literature, the translation of generation theory into practice recommendations generally follows a pattern consistent with translations advanced in other literatures: broad generalisations drawn from limited data are used as evidence to support instructional approaches specifically designed for generational cohorts. Outside HPE, this application of generation theory has been criticised as a form of stereotyping that ignores the internal differences and diversity inherent in any large group of people. Accordingly, problematising the needs of generations such as "Millennial" learners in the HPE literature may perpetuate narrow or privileged assumptions by educators. CONCLUSIONS: Generational archetypes such as that of the "Millennial learner" are myths that perpetuate unfounded generalisations about cohorts, reinforce power differentials between age groups, and minimise the unique needs of individuals. To individualise and strengthen teaching practices in HPE, we recommend adopting "generational humility" as a means to more purposefully address the dynamic social, cultural and historical influences that shape individuals within each generation of learners.

Correction to: Debiasing versus knowledge retrieval checklists to reduce diagnostic error in ECG interpretation.

Due to an unfortunate turn of events, Fig. 3 was omitted from the original publication.

Comfort with uncertainty: reframing our conceptions of how clinicians navigate complex clinical situations.

Learning to take safe and effective action in complex settings rife with uncertainty is essential for patient safety and quality care. Doing so is not easy for trainees, as they often consider certainty to be a necessary precursor for action and subsequently struggle in these settings. Understanding how skillful clinicians work comfortably when uncertain, therefore, offers an important opportunity to facilitate trainees' clinical reasoning development. This critical review aims to define and elaborate the concept of 'comfort with uncertainty' in clinical settings by juxtaposing a variety of frameworks and theories in ways that generate more deliberate ways of thinking about, and researching, this phenomenon. We used Google Scholar to identify theoretical concepts and findings relevant to the topics of 'uncertainty,' 'ambiguity,' 'comfort,' and 'confidence,' and then used preliminary findings to pursue parallel searches within the social cognition, cognition, sociology, sociocultural, philosophy of medicine, and medical education literatures. We treat uncertainty as representing the lived experience of individuals, reflecting the lack of confidence one feels that he/she has an incomplete mental representation of a particular problem. Comfort, in contrast, references confidence in one's capabilities to act (or not act) in a safe and effective manner given the situation. Clinicians' 'comfort with uncertainty' is informed by a variety of perceptual, emotional, and situational cues, and is enabled through a combination of self-monitoring and forward planning. Potential implications of using 'comfort with uncertainty' as a framework for educational and research programs are explored.

Debiasing versus knowledge retrieval checklists to reduce diagnostic error in ECG interpretation.

There is an ongoing debate regarding the cause of diagnostic errors. One view is that errors result from unconscious application of cognitive heuristics; the alternative is that errors are a consequence of knowledge deficits. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of checklists that (a) identify and address cognitive biases or (b) promote knowledge retrieval, as a means to reduce errors in ECG interpretation. Novice postgraduate year (PGY) 1 emergency medicine and internal medicine residents (n = 40) and experienced cardiology fellows (PGY 4-6) (n = 21) were randomly allocated to three conditions: a debiasing checklist, a content (knowledge) checklist, or control (no checklist) to be used while interpreting 20 ECGs. Half of the ECGs were deliberately engineered to predispose to bias. Diagnostic performance under either checklist intervention was not significantly better than the control. As expected, more errors occurred when cases were designed to induce bias (F = 96.9, p < 0.0001). There was no significant interaction between the instructional condition and level of learner. Checklists attempting to help learners identify cognitive bias or mobilize domain-specific knowledge did not have an overall effect in reducing diagnostic errors in ECG interpretation, although they may help novices. Even when cognitive biases are deliberately inserted in cases, cognitive debiasing checklists did not improve participants' performance.

Chart stalking, list making, and physicians' efforts to track patients' outcomes after transitioning responsibility.

CONTEXT: Transitions of patient care responsibility occur frequently between physicians. Resultant discontinuities make it difficult for physicians to observe clinical outcomes. Little is known about what physicians do to overcome the practical challenges to learning these discontinuities create. This study explored physicians' activities in practice as they sought follow-up information about patients. METHODS: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, semi-structured interviews with 18 internal medicine hospitalist and resident physicians at a single tertiary care academic medical center explored participants' strategies when deliberately conducting follow-up after they transitioned responsibility for patients to other physicians. Following open coding, the authors used activity theory (AT) to explore interactions among the social, cultural and material influences related to follow-up. RESULTS: The authors identified three themes related to follow-up: (i) keeping lists to track patients, (ii) learning to create tracking systems and (iii) conducting follow-up. Analysis of participants' follow-up processes as an activity system highlighted key tensions in the system and participants' work adaptations. Tension within functionality of electronic health records for keeping lists (tools) to find information about patients' outcomes (object) resulted in using paper lists as workarounds. Tension between paper lists (tools) and protecting patients' health information (rules) led to rule-breaking or abandoning activities of locating information. Finding time to conduct desired follow-up produced tension between this and other activity systems. CONCLUSION: In clinical environments characterised by discontinuity, lists of patients served as tools for guiding patient care follow-up. The authors offer four recommendations to address the tensions identified through AT: (i) optimise electronic health record tracking systems to eliminate the need for paper lists; (ii) support physicians' skill development in developing and maintaining tracking systems for follow-up; (iii) dedicate time in physicians' work schedules for conducting follow-up; and (iv) engage physicians and patients in determining guidelines for longitudinal tracking that optimise physicians' learning and respect patients' privacy.

What's in a Label? Is Diagnosis the Start or the End of Clinical Reasoning?

Diagnostic reasoning has received substantial attention in the literature, yet what we mean by "diagnosis" may vary. Diagnosis can align with assignment of a "label," where a constellation of signs, symptoms, and test results is unified into a solution at a single point in time. This "diagnostic labeling" conceptualization is embodied in our case-based learning curricula, published case reports, and research studies, all of which treat diagnostic accuracy as the primary outcome. However, this conceptualization may oversimplify the richly iterative and evolutionary nature of clinical reasoning in many settings. Diagnosis can also represent a process of guiding one's thoughts by "making meaning" from data that are intrinsically dynamic, experienced idiosyncratically, negotiated among team members, and rich with opportunities for exploration. Thus, there are two complementary constructions of diagnosis: 1) the correct solution resulting from a diagnostic reasoning process, and 2) a dynamic aid to an ongoing clinical reasoning process. This article discusses the importance of recognizing these two conceptualizations of "diagnosis," outlines the unintended consequences of emphasizing diagnostic labeling as the primary goal of clinical reasoning, and suggests how framing diagnosis as an ongoing process of meaning-making might change how we think about teaching and assessing clinical reasoning.

A systematic review of validity evidence for checklists versus global rating scales in simulation-based assessment.

CONTEXT: The relative advantages and disadvantages of checklists and global rating scales (GRSs) have long been debated. To compare the merits of these scale types, we conducted a systematic review of the validity evidence for checklists and GRSs in the context of simulation-based assessment of health professionals. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of multiple databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus to February 2013. We selected studies that used both a GRS and checklist in the simulation-based assessment of health professionals. Reviewers working in duplicate evaluated five domains of validity evidence, including correlation between scales and reliability. We collected information about raters, instrument characteristics, assessment context, and task. We pooled reliability and correlation coefficients using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: We found 45 studies that used a checklist and GRS in simulation-based assessment. All studies included physicians or physicians in training; one study also included nurse anaesthetists. Topics of assessment included open and laparoscopic surgery (n = 22), endoscopy (n = 8), resuscitation (n = 7) and anaesthesiology (n = 4). The pooled GRS-checklist correlation was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.81, n = 16 studies). Inter-rater reliability was similar between scales (GRS 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.83, n = 23; checklist 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.85, n = 21), whereas GRS inter-item reliabilities (0.92, 95% CI 0.84-0.95, n = 6) and inter-station reliabilities (0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.85, n = 10) were higher than those for checklists (0.66, 95% CI 0-0.84, n = 4 and 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.77, n = 10, respectively). Content evidence for GRSs usually referenced previously reported instruments (n = 33), whereas content evidence for checklists usually described expert consensus (n = 26). Checklists and GRSs usually had similar evidence for relations to other variables. CONCLUSIONS: Checklist inter-rater reliability and trainee discrimination were more favourable than suggested in earlier work, but each task requires a separate checklist. Compared with the checklist, the GRS has higher average inter-item and inter-station reliability, can be used across multiple tasks, and may better capture nuanced elements of expertise.

Emergency medicine residents' knowledge of mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Although Emergency physicians frequently intubate patients, management of mechanical ventilation has not been emphasized in emergency medicine (EM) residency curricula. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to quantify EM residents' education, experience, and knowledge regarding mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We developed a survey of residents' educational experiences with ventilators and an assessment tool with nine clinical questions. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between residents' scores on the assessment instrument and their training, education, and comfort with ventilation. RESULTS: Of 312 EM residents, 218 responded (69.9%). The overall correct response rate for the assessment tool was 73.3%, standard deviation (SD) ± 22.3. Seventy-seven percent (n = 167) of respondents reported ≤ 3 h of mechanical ventilation education in their residency curricula over the past year. Residents reported frequently caring for ventilated patients in the ED, as 64% (n = 139) recalled caring for ≥ 4 ventilated patients per month. Fifty-three percent (n = 116) of residents endorsed feeling comfortable caring for mechanically ventilated ED patients. In multiregression analysis, the only significant predictor of total test score was residents' comfort with caring for mechanically ventilated patients (F = 10.963, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: EM residents report caring for mechanically ventilated patients frequently, but receive little education on mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, as residents' performance on the assessment tool is only correlated with their self-reported comfort with caring for ventilated patients, these results demonstrate an opportunity for increased educational focus on mechanical ventilation management in EM residency training.

A Collaborative Approach to Mentored Peer Reviews Sponsored by the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine.

Introduction: Historically, there have been no systematic programs for teaching peer review, leaving trainees to learn by trial and error. Recently, a number of publications have advocated for programs where experienced reviewers mentor trainees to more efficiently acquire this knowledge. Objective: Our goal was to develop an introductory learning experience that intentionally fosters peer-review skills. Methods: The Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) offered education fellowship directors the opportunity to mentor their fellows by reviewing submitted manuscript(s) supplemented by educational material provided by their journal. Reviews were collaboratively created. The decision letter that was sent to manuscript authors was also sent to the mentees; it included all reviewers' and editor's comments, as feedback. In 2022, fellows received a post-experience survey regarding prior experiences and their perspectives of the mentored peer-review experience. Results: From 2020-2022, participation grew from 14 to 30 education fellowships, providing 76 manuscript peer reviews. The 2022 survey-response rate of 87% (20/23) revealed that fellows were inexperienced in education scholarship prior to participation: 30% had authored an education paper, and 10% had performed peer review of an education manuscript. Overall, participants were enthusiastic about the program and anxious to participate the following year. In addition, participants identified a number of benefits of the mentored experience including improved understanding of the scholarship process; informing fellows' scholarly pursuits; improved conceptualization of concepts learned elsewhere in training; and learning through exposure to scholarship. Conclusion: This program's early findings suggest that collaboration between academic societies and interested graduate medical education faculty has the potential to formalize the process of learning peer review, benefitting all involved stakeholders.

Development and Validation of a Scoring Rubric for Editorial Evaluation of Peer-review Quality: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: Despite the importance of peer review to publications, there is no generally accepted approach for editorial evaluation of a peer review's value to a journal editor's decision-making. The graduate medical education editors of the Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Special Issue in Educational Research & Practice (Special Issue) developed and studied the holistic editor's scoring rubric (HESR) with the objective of assessing the quality of a review and an emphasis on the degree to which it informs a holistic appreciation for the submission under consideration. Methods: Using peer-review guidelines from several journals, the Special Issue's editors formulated the rubric as descriptions of peer reviews of varying degree of quality from the ideal to the unacceptable. Once a review was assessed by each editor using the rubric, the score was submitted to a third party for blinding purposes. We compared the performance of the new rubric to a previously used semantic differential scale instrument. Kane's validity framework guided the evaluation of the new scoring rubric around three basic assumptions: improved distribution of scores; relative consistency rather than absolute inter-rater reliability across editors; and statistical evidence that editors valued peer reviews that contributed most to their decision-making. Results: Ninety peer reviews were the subject of this study, all were assessed by two editors. Compared to the highly skewed distribution of the prior rating scale, the distribution of the new scoring rubric was bell shaped and demonstrated full use of the rubric scale. Absolute agreement between editors was low to moderate, while relative consistency between editor's rubric ratings was high. Finally, we showed that recommendations of higher rated peer reviews were more likely to concur with the editor's formal decision. Conclusion: Early evidence regarding the HESR supports the use of this instrument in determining the quality of peer reviews as well as its relative importance in informing editorial decision-making.

Fostering Adaptive Expertise Through Simulation.

Technology-enhanced simulation has been used to tackle myriad challenges within health professions education. Recently, work has typically adopted a mastery learning orientation that emphasizes trainees' sequential mastery of increasingly complex material. Doing so has privileged a focus on performance and task completion, as captured by trainees' observable behaviors and actions. Designing simulation in these ways has provided important advances to education, clinical care, and patient safety, yet also placed constraints around how simulation-based activities were enacted and learning outcomes were measured. In tracing the contemporary manifestations of simulation in health professions education, this article highlights several unintended consequences of this performance orientation and draws from principles of adaptive expertise to suggest new directions. Instructional approaches grounded in adaptive expertise in other contexts suggest that uncertainty, struggle, invention, and even failure help learners to develop deeper conceptual understanding and learn innovative approaches to novel problems. Adaptive expertise provides a new lens for simulation designers to think intentionally around how idiosyncrasy, individuality, and inventiveness could be enacted as central design principles, providing learners with opportunities to practice and receive feedback around the kinds of complex problems they are likely to encounter in practice. Fostering the growth of adaptive expertise through simulation will require a fundamental reimagining of the design of simulation scenarios, embracing the power of uncertainty and ill-defined problem spaces, and focusing on the structure and pedagogical stance of debriefing. Such an approach may reveal untapped potential within health care simulation.

From Battles to Burnout: Investigating the Role of Interphysician Conflict in Physician Burnout.

PURPOSE: Despite the recognized importance of collaborative communication among physicians, conflict at transitions of care remains a pervasive issue. Recent work has underscored how poor communication can undermine patient safety and organizational efficiency, yet little is known about how interphysician conflict (I-PC) impacts the physicians forced to navigate these tensions. The goal of this study was to explore the social processes and interpersonal interactions surrounding I-PC and their impact, using conversations regarding admission between internal medicine (IM) and emergency medicine (EM) as a lens to explore I-PC in clinical practice. METHOD: The authors used constructivist grounded theory to explore the interpersonal and social dynamics of I-PC. They used purposive sampling to recruit participants, including EM resident and attending physicians and IM attending physicians. The authors conducted hour-long, semistructured interviews between June and October 2020 using the Zoom video conferencing platform. Interviews were coded in 3 phases: initial line-by-line coding, focused coding, and recording. Constant comparative analysis was used to refine emerging codes, and the interview guide was iteratively updated. RESULTS: The authors interviewed 18 residents and attending physicians about how engaging in I-PC led to both personal and professional harm. Specifically, physicians described how I-PC resulted in emotional distress, demoralization, diminished sense of professional attributes, and job dissatisfaction. Participants also described how emotional residue attached to past I-PC events primed the workplace for future conflict. CONCLUSIONS: I-PC may represent a serious yet underrecognized source of harm, not only to patient safety but also to physician well-being. Participants described both the personal and professional consequences of I-PC, which align with the core tenets of burnout. Burnout is a well-established threat to the physician workforce, but unlike many other contributors to burnout, I-PC may be modifiable through improved education that equips physicians with the skills to navigate I-PC throughout their careers.