Evaluating the impact of an educational intervention on the history of racism in America for teaching structural competency to medical academicians.

BACKGROUND: A challenge facing many Academic Health Centers (AHCs) attempting to revise health professions education to include the impact of racism as a social and structural determinant of health (SSDoH) is a lack of broad faculty expertise to reinforce and avoid undermining learning modules addressing this topic. To encourage an institutional culture that is in line with new anti-racism instruction, we developed a six-part educational series on the history of racism in America and its impact on contemporary health inequities for teaching structural competency to health professions academicians. METHODS: We developed a six-hour elective continuing education (CE) series for faculty and staff with the following objectives: (1) describe and discuss race as a social construct; (2) describe and discuss the decolonization of the health sciences and health care; (3) describe and discuss the history of systemic racism and structural violence from a socio-ecological perspective; and (4) describe and discuss reconciliation and repair in biomedicine. The series was spread over a six-month period and each monthly lecture was followed one week later by an open discussion debriefing session. Attendees were assessed on their understanding of each objective before and after each series segment. RESULTS: We found significant increases in knowledge and understanding of each objective as the series progressed. Attendees reported that the series helped them grapple with their discomfort in a constructive manner. Self-selected attendees were overwhelmingly women (81.8%), indicating a greater willingness to engage with this material than men. CONCLUSIONS: The series provides a model for AHCs looking to promote anti-racism and structural competency among their faculty and staff.

Increased Mortality of Black Incarcerated and Hospitalized People: a Single State Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify racial disparities in mortality and post-hospitalization outcomes among incarcerated individuals that were hospitalized during their incarceration period. METHODS: We designed a retrospective cohort study using administrative and hospital data collected from a preferred healthcare referral center for all Massachusetts jails and prisons between January 2011 and December 2018 with linkage to Massachusetts Vital Records and Statistics. We identified 4260 incarcerated individuals with complete data on race/ethnicity that were hospitalized during the study period. The primary study indicators were age, race, ethnicity, length of hospital stay, Elixhauser comorbidity score, incarceration facility type, and number of hospital admissions. The primary outcome was time to death. RESULTS: Of the incarcerated individuals that were hospitalized, 2606 identified as White, 1214 identified as Black, and 411 people who identified as some other race. The hazard of death significantly increased by 3% (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.02-1.03) for each additional yearly increase in age. After adjusting for the interaction between race and age, Black race was significantly associated with 3.01 increased hazard (95% CI: 1.75-5.19) of death for individuals hospitalized while incarcerated compared to White individuals hospitalized while incarcerated. Hispanic ethnicity and being incarcerated in a prison facility was not associated with time to mortality, while increased mean Elixhauser score (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.06-1.08) and ≥ 3 hospital admissions (HR: 2.47; 95% CI: 2.07-2.95) increased the hazard of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest disparities exist in the mortality outcomes among Black and White individuals who are hospitalized during incarceration, with an increased rate of death among Black individuals. Despite hypothesized equal access to healthcare within correctional facilities, our findings suggest that incarcerated and hospitalized Black individuals may experience worse disparities than their White counterparts, which has not been previously explored or reported in the literature. In addition to decarceration, advocacy, and political efforts, increased efforts to support research access to datasets of healthcare outcomes, including hospitalization and death, for incarcerated people should be encouraged. Further research is needed to identify and address the implicit and explicit sources of these racial health disparities across the spectrum of healthcare provision.

Case example of a jail-based cancer prevention clinical trial: Social determinants of health framework, novel experimental design, and retention strategies to facilitate long-term follow-up of clinical trial participants.

Clinical trials conducted with incarcerated populations are rare. We present a case example of one such jail-based cancer prevention clinical trial to demonstrate the importance of including a theory-driven approach to intervention framing, novel experimental designs to boost access to low-risk trials, and retention strategies for long-term follow-up of hard-to-reach populations. As such we offer a social determinant of health framework to ensure cancer prevention research is conducted through the lenses of health promotion and health equity. Deviations from the gold-standard randomized control design, transparent systematic allotment, and street-based outreach retention strategies contribute to the feasibility of conducting clinical trials in carceral settings and after people leave jail. Best practices presented can be used in design and conduct of future clinical trials with criminal legal system-involved populations.

Stakeholder-engaged research is necessary across the criminal-legal spectrum.

People with lived experience of incarceration have higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to people without history of incarceration. Research conducted unethically in prisons and jails led to increased scrutiny of research to ensure the needs of those studied are protected. One consequence of increased restrictions on research with criminal-legal involved populations is reluctance to engage in research evaluations of healthcare for people who are incarcerated and people who have lived experience of incarceration. Ethical research can be done in partnership with people with lived experience of incarceration and other key stakeholders and should be encouraged. In this article, we describe how stakeholder engagement can be accomplished in this setting, and further, how such engagement leads to impactful research that can be disseminated and implemented across disciplines and communities. The goal is to build trust across the spectrum of people who work, live in, or are impacted by the criminal-legal system, with the purpose of moving toward health equity.

Qualitative exploration of the medical learner's journey into correctional health care at an academic medical center and its implications for medical education.

Correctional systems in several U.S. states have entered into partnerships with academic medical centers (AMCs) to provide healthcare for persons who are incarcerated. One AMC specializing in the care of incarcerated patients is the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB), which hosts the only dedicated prison hospital in the U.S. and supplies 80% of the medical care for the entire Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Nearly all medical students and residents at UTMB take part in the care of the incarcerated. This research, through qualitative exploration using focus group discussions, sets out to characterize the correctional care learning environment medical trainees enter. Participants outlined an institutional culture of low prioritization and neglect that dominated the learning environment in the prison hospital, resulting in treatment of the incarcerated as second-class patients. Medical learners pointed to delays in care, both within the prison hospital and within the TDCJ system, where diagnostic, laboratory, and medical procedures were delivered to incarcerated patients at a lower priority compared to free-world patients. Medical learners elaborated further on ethical issues that included the moral judgment of those who are incarcerated, bias in clinical decision making, and concerns for patient autonomy. Medical learners were left to grapple with complex challenges like the problem of dual loyalties without opportunities to critically reflect upon what they experienced. This study finds that, without specific vulnerable populations training for both trainees and correctional care faculty to address these institutional dynamics, AMCs risk replicating a system of exploitation and neglect of incarcerated patients and thereby exacerbating health inequities.

"It's like heaven over there": medicine as discipline and the production of the carceral body.

BACKGROUND: Correctional systems in several U.S. states have entered into partnerships with Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) to provide healthcare for people who are incarcerated. This project was initiated to better understand medical trainee perspectives on training and providing healthcare services to prison populations at one AMC specializing in the care of incarcerated patients: The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB). We set out to characterize the attitudes and perceptions of medical trainees from the start of their training until the final year of Internal Medicine residency. Our goal was to analyze medical trainee perspectives on caring for incarcerated patients and to determine what specialized education and training is needed, if any, for the provision of ethical and appropriate healthcare to incarcerated patients. RESULTS: We found that medical trainees grapple with being beneficiaries of a state and institutional power structure that exploits the neglected health of incarcerated patients for the benefit of medical education and research. The benefits include the training opportunities afforded by the advanced pathologies suffered by persons who are incarcerated, an institutional culture that generally allowed students more freedom to practice their skills on incarcerated patients as compared to free-world patients, and an easy compliance of incarcerated patients likely conditioned by their neglect. Most trainees failed to recognize the extreme power differential between provider and patient that facilitates such freedom. CONCLUSIONS: Using a critical prison studies/Foucauldian theoretical framework, we identified how the provision/withholding of healthcare to and from persons who are incarcerated plays a major role in disciplining incarcerated bodies into becoming compliant medical patients and research subjects, complacent with and even grateful for delayed care, delivered sometimes below the standard best practices. Specialized vulnerable-population training is sorely needed for both medical trainees and attending physicians in order to not further contribute to this exploitation of incarcerated patients.

The eroding principle of justice in teaching medical professionalism.

This article examines the difficulties encountered in teaching professionalism to medical students in the current social and political climate where economic considerations take top priority in health care decision making. The conflict between the commitment to advocate at all times the interests of one's patients over one's own interests is discussed. With personal, institutional, tech industry, pharmaceutical industry, and third-party payer financial imperatives that stand between patients and the delivery of health care, this article investigates how medical ethics instructors are to teach professionalism in a responsible way that does not avoid dealing with the principle of justice.