Holistic Review of Applicants by the United States Postgraduate Training Programs Is Not Associated With the Percentage of Female Residents.

Introduction Given the underrepresentation of female physicians in most specialties and the aim of holistic review in residency applications to improve the diversity of matriculating resident physicians in the United States (US) postgraduate medical training programs, we examined the association between holistic review and female resident representation among US postgraduate training programs. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of US postgraduate training programs to inquire about their use of holistic review for resident applications (independent variable). The primary outcome was the percentage of female residents in each program, which was obtained along with other program-level characteristics from the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access (FREIDA) catalog in April 2023. We limited the analysis to the 10 specialties with the most training spots in 2022, including anesthesiology, emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, neurology, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedic surgery, pediatrics, psychiatry, and surgery (general). We also examined the interactions between holistic review and specialty and the percentage of female faculty using model comparison and simple slopes analyses.  Results Of the 3,364 total programs surveyed from the 10 specialties, 222 (6.6%) responded. Responders and nonresponders had similar program-level characteristics, including program type (e.g., university, community), specialty, and reported minimum board examination scores. Of the 222 responders, 179 (80.6%) reported performing holistic review. The percentage of female residents was 49.0% (interquartile range 37.5 to 66.7) in the no holistic review group and 47.8% (35.4 to 65.0) in the holistic review group (median difference 0.9%, 95% confidence interval -6.7 to 8.3). Furthermore, there was no evidence of interaction between holistic review and either the specialty or the percentage of female faculty on the outcome of the percentage of female residents. Conclusions Holistic review of residency applications in this limited sample of US postgraduate training programs was not associated with the percentage of female residents. The role of holistic review in addressing the imbalance of male and female physicians in the healthcare workforce, particularly between specialties, remains unknown.

DO seniors and IMGs have lower match probabilities than MD seniors after adjusting for specialty choice and USMLE Step 1 score.

CONTEXT: It is unknown if US residency applicants of different educational backgrounds (US allopathic [MD], Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine [DO], and international medical graduates [IMG]) but comparable academic performance have similar match success. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to compare match probabilities between applicant types after adjusting for specialty choice and United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of published data in National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) reports from 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 for US MD seniors, DO seniors, and IMGs (US citizens and non-US citizens). We examined the 10 specialties with the most available spots in 2022. Average marginal effects from a multiple variable logistic regression model were utilized to estimate each non-MD senior applicant type's probability of matching into their preferred specialty compared to MD seniors adjusting for specialty choice, Step 1 score, and match year. RESULTS: Each non-MD applicant type had a lower adjusted percent difference in matching to their preferred specialty than MD seniors, -7.1 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], -11.3 to -2.9) for DO seniors, -45.6 % (-50.6 to -40.5) for US IMGs, and -56.6 % (-61.5 to -51.6) for non-US IMGs. Similarly, each non-MD applicant type had a lower adjusted percent difference in matching than MD seniors across almost all Step 1 score ranges, except for DO seniors with Step 1 scores <200 (-2.0 % [-9.5 to 5.5]). CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for specialty choice, Step 1 score, and match year, non-US MD applicants had lower probabilities of matching into their preferred specialties than their US MD colleagues.

Minimum United States Medical Licensing Examination and Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination Scores Often Do Not Align.

Background Many residency programs do not accept the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX-USA) alone for osteopathic applicants. Furthermore, among those programs that do accept the COMLEX-USA, it is unknown how programs scale their minimum COMLEX-USA scores compared to their minimum United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores. Objective Our objective was to examine the variation of relative within-program differences between minimum USMLE Step and COMLEX-USA Level scores required for consideration by United States residency programs. Methods We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access (FREIDA) database from April 2023, including the 10 specialties with the most training spots in 2022. These specialties were internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, emergency medicine, psychiatry, surgery, anesthesiology, obstetrics-gynecology, orthopedic surgery, and neurology. Within-program differences were calculated by subtracting the minimum USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores from the converted minimum USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores calculated from the minimum COMLEX-USA Level 1 and 2 scores using two conversion tools. We present differences as medians with interquartile ranges (IQR). Additionally, we report the proportion of programs with greater than 10-point differences for each step (1 and 2). Results Of the 3,364 accredited programs from the examined specialties, we included 1,477 in the Step 1 analysis and 1,227 in the Step 2 analysis with complete data. The median within-program difference between the minimum Step 1 score and the predicted Step 1 score was 12.0 (IQR 2.0, 17.0) using the Barnum and colleagues' conversion tool and -1.7 (IQR -6.2, 6.3) using the Smith and colleagues' tool. The median differences for Step 2 were 2.0 (IQR -8.0, 12.0) and -6.5 (IQR -13.9, -1.5) for each tool, respectively. Using the Barnum and Smith conversion tools, 937 (63%) and 435 (29%) programs had a greater than 10-point Step 1 score difference, respectively. Similarly, for Step 2, 564 (46%) and 515 (42%) programs had a greater than 10-point difference with each conversion tool. Conclusion There is wide variation in the within-program differences between minimum USMLE and predicted minimum USMLE (from COMLEX-USA) scores. Many programs have greater than 10-point differences, which may be a source of bias in osteopathic applicant selection.

Mycotic Aortic Aneurysm: A Rare Etiology of Septic Shock.

Mycotic aneurysm of the aorta is a rare disease with a high mortality rate due to its likelihood of aneurysmal rupture. This syndrome is predominantly seen in patients over age 65 with the most common presenting symptoms being fever and back pain. Our case illustrates a mycotic aneurysm of the aorta presenting in an elderly female with vague abdominal pain, flank pain, and generalized weakness. We review the investigative approach, diagnostic modalities, and treatment options in patient management. This case emphasizes the need for a high index of suspicion of mycotic aneurysms of the aorta in critically ill elderly patients as early antibiotic therapy can be crucial for source control.

Reported completion of the USMLE Step 1 and match outcomes among senior osteopathic students in 2020.

CONTEXT: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) is not required for osteopathic students to match into postgraduate programs; however, it is unknown if taking the test improves their chances of matching. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to determine the association between taking the USMLE Step 1 and matching into the applicant's preferred specialty for senior osteopathic students applying to the 10 specialties to which students applied most in 2020. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of the free and publicly available 2020 National Residency Match Program (NRMP) published match report for senior osteopathic students. First, we determined the number of senior osteopathic students that matched into their preferred specialty vs those that did not and stratified them by reported completion of the USMLE Step 1 within each specialty. Next, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) within each specialty for senior osteopathic students matching into their preferred specialty with and without the USMLE Step 1 utilizing the Fisher's exact test. Finally, we repeated the analysis with only senior osteopathic students who had reported USMLE Step 1 scores in ranges including or below the mean for those who matched in their specialty. RESULTS: For senior osteopathic students, reported completion of the USMLE Step 1 was associated with matching for those who applied to Internal Medicine (OR 3.3 [95% confidence interval 2.07 to 5.48]), Emergency Medicine (2.1 [1.35 to 3.17]), Pediatrics (4.4 [1.38 to 18.63]), Psychiatry (2.5 [1.34 to 4.98]), Anesthesiology (3.4 [1.57 to 7.32]), and General Surgery (3.1 [1.56 to 6.14]). After repeating the analysis with only senior osteopathic students who reported low USMLE Step 1 scores, the association remained significant for those who applied to Internal Medicine (2.5 [1.49 to 4.28]), Anesthesiology (2.6 [1.17 to 5.54]), and General Surgery (2.5 [1.24 to 5.04]). CONCLUSIONS: In 2020, reported completion of the USMLE Step 1 by senior osteopathic students was associated with matching for those who applied to Internal Medicine, Emergency Medicine, Pediatrics, Psychiatry, Anesthesiology, and General Surgery. In addition, reported completion of the USMLE Step 1 with a low score was associated with matching for those who applied to Internal Medicine, Anesthesiology, and General Surgery.

The Impact of Advanced Cardiac Life Support Simulation Training on Medical Student Self-reported Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Simulation has become a well-recognized and innovative tool in medical education. While there has been tremendous growth of simulation curricula at the level of graduate medical education, there have been few studies looking at simulation as a learning tool for undergraduate medical education. The goal of this study was to determine if high-fidelity simulation training impacts medical student perception of knowledge and confidence regarding comprehension and application of advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) algorithms. METHODS: This is a prospective observational survey study of third and fourth year medical students who participated in an ACLS simulation training during their emergency medicine rotation between January 2018 and October 2018. Cases covered several ACLS topics including unstable bradycardia, supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia. After each session, students received a short survey to assess their simulation experience pertaining to knowledge and comfort levels with ACLS topics before and after the simulation experience. RESULTS: A total of 89 students were included in the study with 86.5% of those being fourth year students. There was a significant increase in both knowledge (pre-training 3.17 vs. 4.11 post-training, p<0.001) and comfort scores (pre-training 2.54 vs. 3.74 post-training, p<0.001) after the ACLS simulation training. Overall, 77.5% of students reported an increase in knowledge and 83.1% reported an increase in confidence after the training session.  Conclusions: The study revealed a statistically significant increase in both perceived knowledge and comfort and confidence of medical students after high-fidelity simulation using ACLS scenarios.

Administration of Naloxone by Prehospital Personnel: A Retrospective Analysis.

Introduction Patient-specific discrepancies in prehospital naloxone administration have been documented. As the opioid epidemic continues to evolve, further evaluation of prehospital naloxone administration practices is needed. The objective of this study was to compare patients who received prehospital naloxone and received an emergency department (ED) diagnosis of opioid overdose with patients who received prehospital naloxone and received an alternative ED diagnosis.  Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter chart review of patients who received naloxone by prehospital personnel for suspected opioid overdose between October 1, 2016, and October 31, 2017. Patients were excluded if age was less than 18 years, naloxone was administered by non-emergency medical service (EMS) personnel, not transported, or if prehospital records could not be linked with ED records. Demographic information and several prehospital clinical findings, including unresponsiveness, apnea, and miosis, were compared between patients diagnosed with opioid overdoses versus an alternative ED diagnosis. Descriptive statistics were utilized. Results A total of 837 patients had complete data available and were included in the analysis. Overall, 402 (48%) of patients received an ED diagnosis of opioid overdose, and 435 (52%) of patients received an alternative ED diagnosis. Patients in the alternative diagnosis group were older, had less known drug use, were more likely to be admitted, and had lower incidences of apnea, unresponsiveness, and miosis. In the opioid overdose group, there was a higher proportion of previous drug use, apnea, unresponsiveness, and miosis in the EMS setting, whereas there was a higher proportion of previous overdose, previous suicide attempts, and neurological deficits in the ED setting. Conclusions In this retrospective review evaluating patients who received prehospital naloxone, several demographic and clinical differences were noted between the two groups. Further elucidation of the safety and efficacy of prehospital naloxone in alternative diagnoses is needed.

Anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate Receptor Encephalitis.

Anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDA) encephalitis is an underrecognized encephalitis that may be mistaken for a wide variety of mental illnesses and causes of delirium. This syndrome is predominantly present in young females presenting with acute psychotic episodes, autonomic instability, and neurologic abnormalities. It is commonly associated with ovarian teratoma. Our case illustrates anti-NMDA encephalitis presenting in a young female with progressive mental status changes and neurologic abnormalities throughout her emergency department course. We review the investigative approach, diagnostic modalities, and treatment options in patient management. This case emphasizes the need for a high index of suspicion of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis when approaching a patient with unexplained changes in mentation.

Challenging Hazards Amidst Observational Simulation in the Emergency Department: Advancing Gamification in Simulation Education Through a Novel Resident-led Skills Competition.

Medical simulation competitions have become an increasingly popular method to provide a hands-on "gamified" approach to education and training in the health professions. The most well-known competition, SimWars, consists of well-coordinated teams that are tasked with completing a series of mind-bending clinical scenarios in front of a live audience through 'bracket-style' elimination rounds. Similarly, challenging hazards amidst observational simulation (CHAOS) in the emergency department (ED) is another novel approach to gamification in both its structure and feel. Conducted at the Council of Emergency Medicine Resident Directors (CORD) 2018 National Assembly in San Antonio, Texas, instead of assigning premeditated teams, it placed random Emergency Medicine (EM) faculty, residents, and medical students together in teams to test them on a variety of fundamental EM content areas. Additionally, the event incorporated multiple levels within each round, allowing the inclusion of additional information to be shared with participants to support "switching gears," as is typical for teams working in the ED and augmenting the perceived level of "chaos." To assess this pilot project, formal quantitative and qualitative feedback was solicited at the end of the session. Quantitative evaluation of the intervention was obtained through an eight-item questionnaire using a five-point Likert-type scale from 19 of the 20 enrolled participants (95% response rate). Responses were generally positive with an overall course rating score of 4.45 out of 5 (SD +/- 0.62). Qualitative feedback revealed that learners enjoyed performing procedures and networking with their EM colleagues. The majority of residents (95%) recommend the activity be integrated into subsequent conferences. Areas for improvement included shorter cases and minimizing technical malfunctions. CHAOS in the ED was a successful pilot study that incorporated gamification as a means to deploy simulation-based training at a national emergency medicine conference in a community of simulation educators. Future studies should focus on incorporating learners' feedback into subsequent CHAOS iterations and reducing overhead costs to increase its adoption by both regional and national audiences.