Accelerated competency-based education in primary care (ACE-PC): a 3-year UC Davis and Kaiser permanente partnership to meet California's primary care physician workforce needs.

PROBLEM: Our nation faces an urgent need for more primary care (PC) physicians, yet interest in PC careers is dwindling. Students from underrepresented in medicine (UIM) backgrounds are more likely to choose PC and practice in underserved areas yet their representation has declined. Accelerated PC programs have the potential to address workforce needs, lower educational debt, and diversify the physician workforce to advance health equity. APPROACH: With support from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) and the American Medical Association's Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative, University of California School of Medicine (UC Davis) implemented the Accelerated Competency-based Education in Primary Care (ACE-PC) program - a six-year pathway from medical school to residency for students committed to health equity and careers in family medicine or PC-internal medicine. ACE-PC accepts 6-10 students per year using the same holistic admissions process as the 4-year MD program with an additional panel interview that includes affiliated residency program faculty from UC Davis and KPNC. The undergraduate curriculum features: PC continuity clinic with a single preceptor throughout medical school; a 9-month longitudinal integrated clerkship; supportive PC faculty and culture; markedly reduced student debt with full-tuition scholarships; weekly PC didactics; and clinical rotations in affiliated residency programs with the opportunity to match into specific ACE-PC residency tracks. OUTCOMES: Since 2014, 70 students have matriculated to ACE-PC, 71% from UIM groups, 64% are first-generation college students. Of the graduates, 48% have entered residency in family medicine and 52% in PC-internal medicine. In 2020, the first graduates entered the PC workforce; all are practicing in California, including 66% at federally qualified health centers, key providers of underserved care.

Experiences of Leaders in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in US Academic Health Centers.

Importance: The murder of George Floyd in 2020 spurred an outpouring of calls for racial justice in the United States, including within academic medicine. In response, academic health centers announced new antiracism initiatives and expanded their administrative positions related to diversity, equity, and/or inclusion (DEI). Objective: To understand the experiences of DEI leaders at US allopathic medical schools and academic health centers, ie, the structure of their role, official and unofficial responsibilities, access to resources, institutional support, and challenges. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used key informant interviews with participants who held formal DEI positions in their school of medicine, health system, or department. Interviews were conducted from December 2020 to September 2021. Transcripts were coded using a phenomenographic approach, with iterative concurrent analysis to identify thematic categories across participants. Data were analyzed from January to December 2021. Exposure: Formal DEI role. Main Outcomes and Measures: Questions elicited reflection on the responsibilities of the role and the strengths and challenges of the unit or office. Results: A total of 32 participants (18 of 30 [56%] cisgender women; 16 [50%] Black or African American, 6 [19%] Latinx or Hispanic, and 8 [25%] White) from 27 institutions with a mean (range) of 14 (3-43) years of experience in medical education were interviewed. More than half held a dean position (17 [53%]), and multiple participants held 2 or more titled DEI roles (4 [13%]). Two-thirds self-identified as underrepresented in medicine (20 [63%]) and one-third as first generation to attend college (11 [34%]). Key themes reflected ongoing challenges for DEI leaders, including (1) variability in roles, responsibilities, and access to resources, both across participants and institutions as well as within the same position over time; (2) mismatch between institutional investments and directives, including insufficient authority, support staff, and/or funding, and reduced efficacy due to lack of integration with other units within the school or health system; (3) lack of evidence-based practices, theories of change, or standards to guide their work; and (4) work experiences that drive and exhaust leaders. Multiple participants described burnout due to increasing demands that are not met with equivalent increase in institutional support. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, DEI leaders described multiple institutional challenges to their work. To effectively address stated goals of DEI, medical schools and academic centers need to provide leaders with concomitant resources and authority that facilitate change. Institutions need to acknowledge and implement strategies that integrate across units, beyond one leader and office. Policymakers, including professional organizations and accrediting bodies, should provide guidance, accountability mechanisms, and support for research to identify and disseminate evidence for best practices. Creating statements and positions, without mechanisms for change, perpetuates stagnation and injustice.

US Medical School Admissions Leaders' Experiences With Barriers to and Advancements in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

Importance: Despite decades-long calls for increasing racial and ethnic diversity, the medical profession continues to exclude members of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, and Indigenous groups. Objective: To describe US medical school admissions leaders' experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study involved key-informant interviews of 39 deans and directors of admission from 37 US allopathic medical schools across the range of student body racial and ethnic composition. Interviews were conducted in person and online from October 16, 2019, to March 27, 2020, and analyzed from October 2019 to March 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participant experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Results: Among 39 participants from 37 medical schools, admissions experience ranged from 1 to 40 years. Overall, 56.4% of participants identified as women, 10.3% as Asian American, 25.6% as Black or African American, 5.1% as Hispanic or Latinx, and 61.5% as White (participants could report >1 race and/or ethnicity). Participants characterized diversity broadly, with limited attention to racial injustice. Barriers to advancing racial and ethnic diversity included lack of leadership commitment; pressure from faculty and administrators to overemphasize academic scores and school rankings; and political and social influences, such as donors and alumni. Accreditation requirements, holistic review initiatives, and local policy motivated reforms but may also have inadvertently lowered expectations and accountability. Strategies to overcome challenges included narrative change and revision of school leadership structure, admissions goals, practices, and committee membership. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, admissions leaders characterized the ways in which entrenched beliefs, practices, and power structures in medical schools may perpetuate institutional racism, with far-reaching implications for health equity. Participants offered insights on how to remove inequitable structures and implement process changes. Without such action, calls for racial justice will likely remain performative, and racism across health care institutions will continue.