Evaluating Medical Students' Views of the Complexity of Sexual Minority Patients and Implications for Care.

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people experience many health care disparities. We aimed to determine if medical students viewed sexual minority patients (lesbian, gay, or bisexual [LGB] men/women) as more complex than heterosexual patients, even when presenting with the same symptoms, and whether this perceived complexity affected confidence caring for LGB patients. Methods: A fictional patient with an upper respiratory infection was presented with systematic variation of the patient's sexual orientation across six experimental conditions in an online, vignette-based experimental study. Participants rated their perception of the medical, therapeutic, and social complexity of the patient, and completed a measure of stigma toward SGM people. Finally, participants indicated their confidence caring for the presented patient. Results: Overall, 665 students participated. Participants viewed the LGB patients as more complex across all domains, relative to heterosexual patients. Perceived medical and social complexity predicted lower confidence caring for the patient. Participants reported lower confidence caring for gay male patients with indirect effects of medical and social complexity. LGB identity was broadly and indirectly associated with lower confidence through social complexity. Conclusion: Our results suggest students view LGB patients as more complex compared with heterosexual patients. Medical education programs must provide training about the effects of social biases on clinical judgments and care for LGB patients, as well as build skills to ensure confidence caring for LGB patients.

Barriers and Solutions to Advancing Emergency Medicine Simulation-based Research: A Call to Action.

Simulation technology has successfully improved patient safety and care quality through training and assessment of individuals, teams, and health care systems. Emergency medicine (EM) continues to be a leader and pioneer of simulation, including administration of simulation-based fellowships and training programs. However, EM simulation-based research has been limited by low rates of publication and poor methodologic rigor. The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Simulation Academy is leading efforts to improve the quality of scholarship generated by the EM simulation community and to foster successful research careers for future generations of EM simulationists. Through a needs assessment survey of our membership and a year-long consensus-based approach, we identified two main clusters of barriers to simulation-based research: lack of protected time and dedicated resources and limited training and mentorship. As a result, we generated four position statements with implications for education, training, and research in EM simulation and as a call to action for the academic EM community. Recommendations include expansion of funding opportunities for simulation-based research, creation of multi-institutional simulation collaboratives, and development of mentorship and training pathways that promote rigor in design and methodology within EM simulation scholarship.

Management of Rhinitis Medicamentosa: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Rhinitis medicamentosa (RM) is a common condition resulting from overuse of topical nasal decongestants. Despite the prevalence in otolaryngologic practice, a clear treatment protocol has not been established. Our objective was to review the current published literature pertaining to the treatment of RM with the possibility of finding data that support one treatment over another. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were examined for patients diagnosed with RM resulting from chronic use of topical nasal decongestants. REVIEW METHODS: The PRISMA standard (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) was utilized to identify English-language studies reporting treatment of patients with the primary diagnosis of RM after chronic use of a topical decongestant. Outcome measures of interest included patient-reported symptom relief and objective parameters. MINORS criteria (methodological index for nonrandomized studies) were used to assess the quality of articles. RESULTS: A total of 350 articles were identified, 9 of which met final inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis. Outcomes defined in each publication were highly varied and relied on several unstandardized measures. The most commonly reported treatment option was topical nasal steroids, although overall there was limited evidence on which to base treatment recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: There is not adequate evidence to develop a standardized treatment protocol for RM. The development of a uniform questionnaire, standard outcomes to be measured, and a method of assessing such outcomes is necessary. Prospective randomized controlled studies are warranted to determine the optimal treatment regimen following diagnosis of RM.