When public health messages become stressful: Managing chronic disease during COVID-19.

To curb the spread of COVID-19, the United States has endorsed a variety of public health measures and distributed their content expediently. While these measures are critical for saving the lives of thousands, they may be sources of stress for individuals managing a chronic disease or make disease management more challenging. Forty-five percent of Americans live with chronic disease and already manage a range of everyday stressors related to their disease, making the additional stress produced by this public health guidance and their messages more difficult. Guided by Cohen and colleagues' Stage Model of Stress and Disease (Cohen et al., 2016) and Ryan and Sawin's Individual and Family Self-Management Theory (Ryan & Sawin, 2009), this paper identifies the various dimensions of these public health measures that may cause stress and negatively impact individuals managing chronic disease. Further, this paper presents a conceptual model for understanding how these stressors and common stressors associated with managing chronic disease interact and significantly impact chronic disease management. Considering the impact of these stressors on individuals managing chronic disease is paramount to ensure this population is empowered to manage this additional stress healthily and effectively. Recommendations for individuals managing chronic disease and health care professionals working with this population are provided.

A case for an international health elective training program during residency: a four-points call for action.

BACKGROUND: International Health Electives (IHE) are becoming more popular among graduate training programs. This is likely due to the high demands from graduating medical students who are seeking to have an international health experience during their post-graduate training. Despite the important educational experiences associated with an IHE, this opportunity does not exist in all graduate medical programs and fewer have formal established programs. SUMMARY: We are suggesting that graduate training programs are in a unique position to provide such experiences to our future physicians, in turn creating immediate benefits to host nations as well as long-term impacts on our society in the United States. We are proposing Four Points for stakeholders involved in training future physicians to use as they consider designing such opportunities for future trainees. The four points include: residents are capable of providing service to host nations, improve the quality of care to communities in the U.S., foster graduating medical students' global health interests and increase global health mentorship. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that addressing these four points will reemphasize the importance of establishing an IHE in all graduate training programs.

An international health elective in Haiti: a case for osteopathic medicine.

As global health education becomes increasingly important, more physicians are participating in international health electives (IHEs). Haiti is a favorable site for an IHE because of its substantial health care needs and rich culture. Although both osteopathic and allopathic physicians can provide effective health care to Haitians, osteopathic physicians may be particularly well suited to serve in Haiti because of their training in osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT). Because OMT's laying of the hands (high touch) is similar to the touch inherent to Haiti's traditional ethnomedical practices, osteopathic physicians' use of OMT can enhance trust among Haitians and increase Haitians' willingness to work with westernized medical practitioners. In addition, an IHE in a low-resource country such as Haiti can provide osteopathic physicians with a global outlook on medicine and a range of critical communication and clinical skills. The authors advocate for the development of an IHE in Haiti for osteopathic physicians.

Global health experiences of U.S. Physicians: a mixed methods survey of clinician-researchers and health policy leaders.

BACKGROUND: Interest and participation in global health activities among U.S. medical trainees has increased sharply in recent decades, yet the global health activities of physicians who have completed residency training remain understudied. Our objectives were to assess associations between individual characteristics and patterns of post-residency global health activities across the domains of health policy, education, and research. METHODS: Cross-sectional, mixed methods national survey of 521 physicians with formal training in clinical and health services research and policy leadership. Main measures were post-residency global health activity and characteristics of this activity (location, funding, products, and perceived synergy with domestic activities). RESULTS: Most respondents (73%) hold faculty appointments across 84 U.S. medical schools and a strong plurality (46%) are trained in internal medicine. Nearly half of all respondents (44%) reported some global health activity after residency; however, the majority of this group (73%) reported spending ≤10% of professional time on global health in the past year. Among those active in global health, the majority (78%) reported receiving some funding for their global health activities, and most (83%) reported at least one scholarly, educational, or other product resulting from this work. Many respondents perceived synergies between domestic and global health activities, with 85% agreeing with the statement that their global health activities had enhanced the quality of their domestic work and increased their level of involvement with vulnerable populations, health policy advocacy, or research on the social determinants of health. Despite these perceived synergies, qualitative data from in-depth interviews revealed personal and institutional barriers to sustained global health involvement, including work-family balance and a lack of specific avenues for career development in global health. CONCLUSIONS: Post-residency global health activity is common in this diverse, multi-specialty group of physicians. Although those with global health experience describe synergies with their domestic work, the lack of established career development pathways may limit the benefits of this synergy for individuals and their institutions.

International health electives: strengthening graduate medical education.

An international health elective (IHE) can be an important component of the medical education and professional development of a physician. It provides essential global health skills that are crucial in a globalized society. Graduate medical education has an opportunity to deliver such skills to our health care workforce while addressing the pending workforce shortage and the uneven distribution of primary care physicians across the United States. Currently, there is a call for graduate medical education programs to create more training sites and to undergo reform that will help fill residency slots and train more primary care physicians. The author proposes that graduate medical education programs incorporate international health electives into their accredited residency programs. This addition could potentially strengthen their programs while making them more appealing to qualified candidates.