How Are We Teaching Advocacy? A National Survey of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors.

BACKGROUND: Although internal medicine (IM) physicians accept public advocacy as a professional responsibility, there is little evidence that IM training programs teach advocacy skills. The prevalence and characteristics of public advocacy curricula in US IM residency programs are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence and characteristics of curricula in US IM residencies addressing public advocacy for communities and populations; to describe barriers to the provision of such curricula. DESIGN: Nationally representative, web-based, cross-sectional survey of IM residency program directors with membership in an academic professional association. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 276 IM residency program directors (61%) responded between August and December 2022. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of US IM residency programs that teach advocacy curricula; characteristics of advocacy curricula; perceptions of barriers to teaching advocacy. KEY RESULTS: More than half of respondents reported that their programs offer no advocacy curricula (148/276, 53.6%). Ninety-five programs (95/276, 34.4%) reported required advocacy curricula; 33 programs (33/276, 12%) provided curricula as elective only. The content, structure, and teaching methods of advocacy curricula in IM programs were heterogeneous; experiential learning in required curricula was low (23/95, 24.2%) compared to that in elective curricula (51/65, 78.5%). The most highly reported barriers to implementing or improving upon advocacy curricula (multiple responses allowed) were lack of faculty expertise in advocacy (200/276, 72%), inadequate faculty time (190/276, 69%), and limited curricular flexibility (148/276, 54%). CONCLUSION: Over half of US IM residency programs offer no formal training in public advocacy skills and many reported lack of faculty expertise in public advocacy as a barrier. These findings suggest many IM residents are not taught how to advocate for communities and populations. Further, less than one-quarter of required curricula in public advocacy involves experiential learning.

Hospitalists as Triagists: Description of the Triagist Role across Academic Medical Centers.

From the hospitalist perspective, triaging involves the evaluation of a patient for potential admission to an inpatient service. Although traditionally done by residents, many academic hospitalist groups have assumed the responsibility for triaging. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 235 adult hospitalists at 10 academic medical centers (AMCs) to describe the similarities and differences in the triagist role and assess the activities and skills associated with the role. Eight AMCs have a defined triagist role; at the others, hospitalists supervise residents/advanced practice providers. The triagist role is generally filled by a faculty physician and shared by all hospitalists.We found significant variability in verbal communication practices (P = .02) and electronic communication practices (P < .0001) between the triagist and the current provider (eg, emergency department, clinic provider), and in the percentage of patients evaluated in person (P < .0001). Communication skills, personal efficiency, and systems knowledge are dominant themes of attributes of an effective triagist.

Triaging Inpatient Admissions: an Opportunity for Resident Education.

In the context of internal medicine, "triage" is a newly popularized term that refers to constellation of activities related to determining the most appropriate disposition plans for patients, including assessing patients for admissions into the inpatient medicine service. The physician or "triagist" plays a critical role in the transition of care from the outpatient to the inpatient settings, yet little literature exists addressing this particular transition. The importance of this set of responsibilities has evolved over time as health systems become increasingly complex to navigate for physicians and patients. With the emphasis on hospital efficiency metrics such as emergency department throughput and appropriateness of admissions, this type of systems-based thinking is a necessary skill for practicing contemporary inpatient medicine. We believe that triaging admissions is a critical transition in the care continuum and represents an entrustable professional activity that integrates skills across multiple Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies that internal medicine residents must master. Specific curricular competencies that address the domains of provider, system, and patient will deliver a solid foundation to fill a gap in skills and knowledge for the triagist role in IM residency training.

Who Consults Us and Why? An Evaluation of Medicine Consult/Comanagement Services at Academic Medical Centers.

Although general medicine consultation is an integral component of inpatient medical care and a requirement of internal medicine training, little is known about current consultative practice. We used a cross-sectional, prospective survey design to examine current practices at 11 academic medical centers over four two-week periods from July 2014 through July 2015. Out of 11 consult services, four had comanagement agreements with surgical services, primarily with orthopedic surgery. We collected data regarding 1,264 consultation requests. Most requests (82.2%) originated from surgical services, with most requests originating from either orthopedic surgery (44.4%) or neurosurgery (11.6%). The most common reason for consultation at sites with a consult and comanagement service was medical management/ comanagement (23.3%) and at sites with a consultonly service was preoperative evaluation (16.4%). On average, consultants addressed more than two reasons per encounter. Many of these reasons were unidentified by the consulting service. Learners on these services should perform comprehensive evaluations to identify potentially unidentified issues.

A Guide to Fluorescent Protein FRET Pairs.

Förster or fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) technology and genetically encoded FRET biosensors provide a powerful tool for visualizing signaling molecules in live cells with high spatiotemporal resolution. Fluorescent proteins (FPs) are most commonly used as both donor and acceptor fluorophores in FRET biosensors, especially since FPs are genetically encodable and live-cell compatible. In this review, we will provide an overview of methods to measure FRET changes in biological contexts, discuss the palette of FP FRET pairs developed and their relative strengths and weaknesses, and note important factors to consider when using FPs for FRET studies.

Improving brightness and photostability of green and red fluorescent proteins for live cell imaging and FRET reporting.

Many genetically encoded biosensors use Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) to dynamically report biomolecular activities. While pairs of cyan and yellow fluorescent proteins (FPs) are most commonly used as FRET partner fluorophores, respectively, green and red FPs offer distinct advantages for FRET, such as greater spectral separation, less phototoxicity, and lower autofluorescence. We previously developed the green-red FRET pair Clover and mRuby2, which improves responsiveness in intramolecular FRET reporters with different designs. Here we report the engineering of brighter and more photostable variants, mClover3 and mRuby3. mClover3 improves photostability by 60% and mRuby3 by 200% over the previous generation of fluorophores. Notably, mRuby3 is also 35% brighter than mRuby2, making it both the brightest and most photostable monomeric red FP yet characterized. Furthermore, we developed a standardized methodology for assessing FP performance in mammalian cells as stand-alone markers and as FRET partners. We found that mClover3 or mRuby3 expression in mammalian cells provides the highest fluorescence signals of all jellyfish GFP or coral RFP derivatives, respectively. Finally, using mClover3 and mRuby3, we engineered an improved version of the CaMKIIα reporter Camuiα with a larger response amplitude.

Exploring end-of-residency transitions in a VA Patient Aligned Care Team.

BACKGROUND: End-of-residency transitions create disruptions in primary care continuity. The national implementation of Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) in Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care clinics creates an opportunity to mitigate this discontinuity through the provision of team-based care. OBJECTIVES: To identify team-based solutions to end-of-residency transitions in a resident PACT continuity clinic by assessing the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of non-physician PACT members and resident PACT physicians. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional survey of 27 resident physicians and 24 non-physician PACT members in the Internal Medicine Clinic at the Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital in the South Texas Veterans Health Care System. RESULTS: Twenty-seven residents and 24 non-physician PACT members completed the survey, with response rates of 90 % and 100 %, respectively. All residents and 96 % of non-physician PACT members agreed or strongly agreed that the residents were responsible for informing patients about end-of-residency transitions. Only 38 % of non-physician PACT members versus 52 % of residents indicated that non-physician PACT members should be responsible for this transition. Approximately 80 % of resident physicians and non-physician PACT members agreed there should be a formalized approach to these transitions; 67 % of non-physician PACT members were willing to support this transition. Potential barriers to team-based care transitions were identified. Major themes of write-in suggestions for improving the transition focused on communication and relationships between the patient and PACT and among the PACT members. CONCLUSIONS: PACT implementation changes the roles and relationship structures among all team members. While end-of-residency transitions create a disruption in the relationship system, the remainder of the PACT may bridge this transition. Our results demonstrate the importance of a team-based solution that engages all PACT members by improving communication and fostering effective team relationships.