Comprehensive Curriculum for Internal Medicine Residents on Primary Care of Patients Identifying as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender.

Introduction: Significant gaps remain in the training of health professionals regarding the care of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT). Although curricula have been developed at the undergraduate medical education level, few materials address the education of graduate medical trainees. The purpose of this curriculum was to develop case-based modules targeting internal medicine residents to address LGBT primary health care. Methods: We designed and implemented a four-module, case-based, interactive curriculum at one university's internal medicine residency program. The modules contained facilitator and learner guides and addressed four main content areas: understanding gender and sexuality; performing a sensitive history and physical examination; health promotion and disease prevention; and mental health, violence, and reproductive health. Knowledge, perceived importance, and confidence were assessed before and after each module to assess curricular effectiveness and acceptability. General medicine faculty delivered these modules. Results: Perceived importance of LGBT topics was high at baseline and remained high after the curricular intervention. Confidence significantly increased in many areas, including being able to provide resources to patients and to institute gender-affirming practices (p < .05). Knowledge improved significantly on almost all topics (p < .0001). Faculty felt the materials gave enough preparation to teach, and residents perceived that the faculty were knowledgeable. Discussion: This resource provides an effective curriculum for training internal medicine residents to better understand and feel confident addressing LGBT primary health care needs. Despite limitations, this is an easily transferable curriculum that can be adapted in a variety of curricular settings.

A Qualitative Analysis of Resident Adverse Event Reporting: What's Holding Us Back.

This study utilized focus groups of residents, who report adverse events at differing rates depending on their hospital site, to better understand barriers to residents' reporting and identify modifiable aspects of an institution's culture that could encourage resident event reporting. Focus groups included residents who rotated at 3 hospitals and represented 4 training programs. Focus groups were audio recorded and analyzed using qualitative methods. A total of 64 residents participated in 8 focus groups. Reporting behavior varied by hospital culture. Residents worried about damage to their professional relationships and lacked insight into the benefits of multiple reports of the same event or how human factors engineering can prevent errors. Residents did not understand how reporting affects litigation. Residents at other academic institutions likely experience similar barriers. This study illustrates that resident reporting is modifiable by changing hospital culture, but hospitals have only a few opportunities to mishandle reporting before resident reporting attitudes solidify.

Encouraging Resident Adverse Event Reporting: A Qualitative Study of Suggestions from the Front Lines.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about what motivates residents to report adverse events. The goals of the qualitative study were to: (1) better understand facilitators to residents' event reporting and (2) identify effective interventions that encourage residents to report. METHODS: The authors conducted focus groups of upper-level residents from 4 training programs (2 internal medicine, a pediatric, and a combined medicine-pediatric) who rotated at 3 institutions within a large healthcare system in 2016. Quantitative data on reporting experience were gathered. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Two coders reviewed transcripts using the editing approach and organized codes into themes. RESULTS: Sixty-four residents participated in 8 focus groups. Residents were universally exposed to reportable events and knew how to report. Residents' reporting behavior varied by site according to local culture, with residents filing more reports at the pediatric hospital compared to other sites, but all groups expressed similar general views about facilitators to reporting. Facilitators included familiarity with the investigation process, reporting via telephone, and routine safety educational sessions with safety administrators. Residents identified specific interventions that encouraged reporting at the pediatric hospital, including incorporating an attending physician review of events into sign-out and training on error disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into what motivates resident event reporting and describes concrete interventions to increase reporting. Our findings are consistent with the Theoretical Domains Framework of behavioral change. These strategies could prove successful at other pediatric hospitals to build a culture that values reporting and prepares residents as patient safety champions.