The Senior Resident-Fellow Dynamic on Pediatric Hospital Medicine Teams: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: With the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accreditation in place for pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) fellowships, fellows are playing a larger role in resident education. However, the impact of PHM fellows on pediatric residency training is not well described. We aimed to identify the factors that affect the dynamic between senior residents and fellows working together on PHM teams. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we used purposive sampling and interviewed 15 senior residents and 8 PHM fellows between April and September 2020. We created a conceptual framework for the senior resident-fellow dynamic to develop the interview guide. Using verbatim transcripts uploaded into Dedoose software, 2 authors coded responses and identified themes using directed content analysis. RESULTS: Twelve themes emerged as factors that impact the senior resident-fellow dynamic and fell into 6 categories: Team organization, role clarity, teaching, fellow approachability, decision-making, and attending involvement. Both senior residents and PHM fellows described an optimal dynamic in which a hierarchal approach to team structure, teaching, and decision-making is counterbalanced by fellow approachability. Role uncertainty, especially with increased attending involvement, led to conflict between residents and fellows. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that a structured hierarchy surrounding supervision, decision-making, and teaching promoted level-appropriate autonomy for both senior residents and fellows. These findings can be used to design an intervention, such as a leadership curriculum for fellows and senior residents, to target behaviors that facilitate a stepwise approach to supervision and patient care.

The Silent Pandemic: the Impact of COVID-19 on the Mental Health of Adolescents Living with HIV.

Purpose of Review: The pandemic caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of confirmed cases and likely more than six million deaths globally Worldometer (2022). We sought to understand secondary mental effects in adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) on the African continent caused by lockdowns, school closures, and other restriction measures for infection control. We reviewed the broader literature and conducted 86 retrospective chart reviews of mental health disorders of ALHIV and interventions utilized at a pediatric clinic in Eswatini. Recent Findings: ALHIVs are disproportionately affected by mental health disorders. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated adverse mental health outcomes of adolescents on the African continent, especially for ALHIV. There have been many calls for researchers, clinicians, and governments to prioritize mental health in adolescents going forward. Summary: In pediatric clinics in Eswatini, Malawi, and Uganda, there were psychosocial measures in place prior to the COVID-19 pandemic for ALHIV. After looking closely at a pediatric clinic in Eswatini, we found that many interventions were paused and new psychosocial interventions compatible with social distancing were instead utilized by clinicians. Even so, after multidisciplinary management comprising of interventions such as psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, referral to psychologists/psychiatrists, and enrollment in peer support groups, the PHQ-9 depressions scores of ALHIV during the COVID-19 significantly improved. We found that there is a need for age-specific standardized tools to measure depression in ALHIV. Furthermore, more research is needed on the effectiveness and scope of psychosocial interventions for ALHIV post-COVID-19 throughout Eswatini and the African continent.

Using the Assessment of Reasoning Tool to facilitate feedback about diagnostic reasoning.

OBJECTIVES: Idiosyncratic approaches to reasoning among teachers and limited reliable workplace-based assessment and feedback methods make teaching diagnostic reasoning challenging. The Assessment of Reasoning Tool (ART) was developed to fill this gap, but its utility and feasibility in providing feedback to residents has not been studied. We evaluated how the ART was used to assess, teach, and guide feedback on diagnostic reasoning to pediatric interns. METHODS: We used an integrated mixed-methods approach to evaluate how the ART facilitates the feedback process between clinical teachers and learners. We collected data from surveys of pediatric interns and interviews of hospital medicine faculty at Baylor College of Medicine from 2019 to 2020. Interns completed the survey each time they received feedback from their attending that was guided by the ART. The preliminary intern survey results informed the faculty interview questions. We integrated descriptive statistics of the survey with the thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Survey data (52 survey responses from 38 interns) and transcribed interviews (10 faculty) were analyzed. The ART framework provided a shared mental model which facilitated a feedback conversation. The ART-guided feedback was highly rated in terms of structure, content, and clarity in goal-setting while enabling new learning opportunities. Barriers to using the ART included limited time and inter-faculty variability of its use. CONCLUSIONS: The ART facilitated effective and feasible faculty feedback to interns on their diagnostic reasoning skills.

Comparison of a Teaching and Nonteaching Service at a Children's Hospital in the Community.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of trainees on inpatient patient care is incompletely understood. This study sought to discern the impact of trainees on patient outcomes and costs at a children's hospital in the community. We hypothesized that there would be no differences in patient outcomes and costs on an inpatient teaching service compared to a nonteaching service. As a secondary goal, we analyzed trainee evaluations. METHODS: The authors conducted a cohort study of patients hospitalized from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017 on an acute care unit in a children's hospital in the community. Using t test or Fisher exact test, the authors compared patient outcomes between teaching and nonteaching services including, length of stay, discharge times, readmission rates, rapid response team (RRT) calls, pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) transfers, hospital transfers, and costs. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 1066 patients admitted and discharged from the teaching service and 1038 from the nonteaching service. There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics or patient complexity. Similarly, there were no differences in length of stay, discharge times, readmission rates, RRT calls, PICU transfers, hospital transfers or patient costs between services. Trainee evaluations of the inpatient experience were overwhelmingly positive. CONCLUSIONS: In a children's hospital in the community, there were no significant differences in patient outcomes and costs on a teaching service compared to a nonteaching service. Furthermore, trainee evaluations suggested a favorable learning experience, illustrating the feasibility of incorporating trainees into inpatient care in a nontraditional learner setting.

COVID-19 Impact on Intern Exposure to Common Inpatient Diagnoses.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the clinical exposure of pediatric interns to common pediatric inpatient diagnoses. METHODS: We analyzed electronic medical record data to compare intern clinical exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic from June 2020 through February 2021 with the same academic blocks from 2017 to 2020. We attributed patients to each pediatric intern on the basis of notes written during their pediatric hospital medicine rotation to compare intern exposures with common inpatient diagnoses before and during the pandemic. We compared the median number of notes written per intern per block overall, as well as for each common inpatient diagnosis. RESULTS: Median counts of notes written per intern per block were significantly reduced in the COVID-19 group compared with the pre-COVID-19 group (96 [interquartile range (IQR): 81-119)] vs 129 [IQR: 110-160]; P < .001). Median intern notes per block was lower in the COVID-19 group for all months except February 2021. Although the median number of notes for many common inpatient diagnoses was significantly reduced, they were higher for mental health (4 [IQR: 2-9] vs 2 [IQR: 1-6]; P < .001) and suicidality (4.5 [IQR: 2-8] vs 0 [IQR: 0-2]; P < .001). Median shifts worked per intern per block was also reduced in the COVID-19 group (22 [IQR: 21-23] vs 23 [IQR: 22-24]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal a significant reduction in resident exposure to many common inpatient pediatric diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Residency programs and pediatric hospitalist educators should consider curricular interventions to ensure adequate clinical exposure for residents affected by the pandemic.

COVID-19 Impact on Intern Exposure to Common Inpatient Diagnoses.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the clinical exposure of pediatric interns to common pediatric inpatient diagnoses. METHODS: We analyzed electronic medical record data to compare intern clinical exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic from June 2020 through February 2021 with the same academic blocks from 2017 to 2020. We attributed patients to each pediatric intern on the basis of notes written during their pediatric hospital medicine rotation to compare intern exposures with common inpatient diagnoses before and during the pandemic. We compared the median number of notes written per intern per block overall, as well as for each common inpatient diagnosis. RESULTS: Median counts of notes written per intern per block were significantly reduced in the COVID-19 group compared with the pre-COVID-19 group (96 [interquartile range (IQR): 81-119)] vs 129 [IQR: 110-160]; P < .001). Median intern notes per block was lower in the COVID-19 group for all months except February 2021. Although the median number of notes for many common inpatient diagnoses was significantly reduced, they were higher for mental health (4 [IQR: 2-9] vs 2 [IQR: 1-6]; P < .001) and suicidality (4.5 [IQR: 2-8] vs 0 [IQR: 0-2]; P < .001). Median shifts worked per intern per block was also reduced in the COVID-19 group (22 [IQR: 21-23] vs 23 [IQR: 22-24]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal a significant reduction in resident exposure to many common inpatient pediatric diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Residency programs and pediatric hospitalist educators should consider curricular interventions to ensure adequate clinical exposure for residents affected by the pandemic.

"PLEASE Complete Your Evaluations!" Strategies to Engage Faculty in Competency-Based Assessments.

Competency-based assessments (CBAs) have gained traction in graduate medical education and inform important learner outcomes through the continuum of medical training. Active participation in new CBAs presents challenges to faculty working in a busy clinical environment. As such, the implementation of new CBAs can be approached with intention to foster acceptance and engagement with new evaluations. This paper describes strategies utilized to implement CBAs among clinician educators during a national assessment pilot. Our methods are grounded in educational, psychological, business, ecological, communication, and information technology theory. Our primary interventions included creating a multilevel vision, engaging a dedicated work group, incorporating quality improvement methodology, and integrating technology to successfully implement the assessments. These practical and effective interventions may also be applied to the implementation of other educational innovations.

Teaching Diagnostic Reasoning to Faculty Using an Assessment for Learning Tool: Training the Trainer.

Introduction: There is a need for a standardized approach to understand and assess clinical reasoning in medical learners. The Assessment of Reasoning Tool was developed based on prevalent theories and frameworks using a multidisciplinary expert panel. As the tool provides a standardized rubric for assessing clinical reasoning, we designed an interactive train-the-trainer workshop for clinical educators and education leaders interested in improving their teaching skills and/or introducing curricula surrounding diagnostic reasoning. Methods: In this workshop, participants were exposed to the major domains of diagnostic reasoning and how to apply it to the assessment of a learner's skills. Kolb's experiential learning was the underlying model, which we showcased by using multiple interactive techniques, including small-group discussion, peer sharing, and case practice. We presented the workshop at a national conference of pediatric educators and as a faculty development workshop at a single institution. Participants were asked to complete a survey after the workshop to gauge their reactions and look for areas of improvement. Results: A total of 34 participants attended the two workshops. Participants rated the workshop favorably, with most planning to make a change to their practice. Comments were largely positive, emphasizing the benefits of the interactive approach. Discussion: The workshop and teaching materials represent an important early step in the workplace-based assessment of diagnostic reasoning in medical learners. Grounded in the clinical reasoning literature, the workshop offers one approach to assessing these skills in learners with or without direct observation of clinical skills.

Pediatric Clinician Comfort Discussing Diagnostic Errors for Improving Patient Safety: A Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Meaningful conversations about diagnostic errors require safety cultures where clinicians are comfortable discussing errors openly. However, clinician comfort discussing diagnostic errors publicly and barriers to these discussions remain unexplored. We compared clinicians' comfort discussing diagnostic errors to other medical errors and identified barriers to open discussion. METHODS: Pediatric clinicians at 4 hospitals were surveyed between May and June 2018. The survey assessed respondents' comfort discussing medical errors (with varying degrees of system versus individual clinician responsibility) during morbidity and mortality conferences and privately with peers. Respondents reported the most significant barriers to discussing diagnostic errors publicly. Poststratification weighting accounted for nonresponse bias; the Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment was applied to control for false discovery (significance set at P < 0.018). RESULTS: Clinicians (n = 838; response rate 22.6%) were significantly less comfortable discussing all error types during morbidity and mortality conferences than privately (P < 0.004) and significantly less comfortable discussing diagnostic errors compared with other medical errors (P < 0.018). Comfort did not differ by clinician type or years in practice; clinicians at one institution were significantly less comfortable discussing diagnostic errors compared with peers at other institutions. The most frequently cited barriers to discussing diagnostic errors publicly included feeling like a bad clinician, loss of reputation, and peer judgment of knowledge base and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians are more uncomfortable discussing diagnostic errors than other types of medical errors. The most frequent barriers involve the public perception of clinical performance. Addressing this aspect of safety culture may improve clinician participation in efforts to reduce harm from diagnostic errors.

Pediatric clinician perspectives on communicating diagnostic uncertainty.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnosis often evolves over time, involves uncertainty, and is vulnerable to errors. We examined pediatric clinicians' perspectives on communicating diagnostic uncertainty to patients' parents and how this occurs. DESIGN: We conducted semi-structured interviews, which were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis. Two researchers independently coded transcripts and then discussed discrepancies to reach consensus. SETTING: A purposive sample of pediatric clinicians at two large academic medical institutions in Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty pediatric clinicians participated: 18 physicians, 2 nurse practitioners; 7 males, 13 females; 7 inpatient, 11 outpatient, and 2 practicing in mixed settings; with 0-16 years' experience post-residency. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Pediatric clinician perspectives on communication of diagnostic uncertainty. RESULTS: Pediatric clinicians commonly experienced diagnostic uncertainty and most were comfortable seeking help and discussing with colleagues. However, when communicating uncertainty to parents, clinicians used multiple considerations to adjust the degree to which they communicated. Considerations included parent characteristics (education, socioeconomic status, emotional response, and culture) and strength of parent-clinician relationships. Communication content included setting expectations, explaining the diagnostic process, discussing most relevant differentials, and providing reassurance. Responses to certain parent characteristics, however, were variable. For example, some clinicians were more open to discussing diagnostic uncertainty with more educated parents- others were less. CONCLUSIONS: While pediatric clinicians are comfortable discussing diagnostic uncertainty with colleagues, how they communicate uncertainty to parents appears variable. Parent characteristics and parent-clinician relationships affect extent of communication and content discussed. Development and implementation of optimal strategies for managing and communicating diagnostic uncertainty can improve the diagnostic process.

Patient perspectives on how physicians communicate diagnostic uncertainty: An experimental vignette study.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effects of three different strategies for communicating diagnostic uncertainty on patient perceptions of physician competence and visit satisfaction. DESIGN/SETTING: Experimental vignette-based study design involving pediatric cases presented to a convenience sample of parents living in a large US city. PARTICIPANTS/INTERVENTION(S): Three vignettes were developed, each describing one of three different ways physicians communicated diagnostic uncertainty to parents-(i) explicit expression of uncertainty ('not sure' about diagnosis), (ii) implicit expression of uncertainty using broad differential diagnoses and (iii) implicit expression of uncertainty using 'most likely' diagnoses. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three vignettes and then answered a 37-item web-based questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Outcome variables included parent-perceived technical competence of physician, trust and confidence, visit satisfaction and adherence to physician instructions. Differences between the three groups were compared using analysis of variance, followed by individual post hoc analyses with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Seventy-one participants completed the vignette questions. Demographic characteristics and scores on activation (parent activation measure [PAM]) and intolerance to uncertainty were similar across the three groups. Explicit expression of uncertainty was associated with lower perceived technical competence, less trust and confidence, and lower patient adherence as compared to the two groups with implicit communication. These latter two groups had comparable outcomes. CONCLUSION: Parents may react less negatively in terms of perceived competence, physician confidence and trust, and intention to adhere when diagnostic uncertainty is communicated using implicit strategies, such as using broad differential diagnoses or most likely diagnoses. Evidence-based strategies to communicate diagnostic uncertainty to patients need further development.

Creating a medical education enterprise: leveling the playing fields of medical education vs. medical science research within core missions.

BACKGROUND: Unlike publications of medical science research that are more readily rewarded, clinician-educators' scholarly achievements are more nebulous and under-recognized. OBJECTIVE: Create an education enterprise that empowers clinician-educators to engage in a broad range of scholarly activities and produce educational scholarship using strategic approaches to level the playing fields within an organization. DESIGN: The authors analyzed the advantages and disadvantages experienced by medical science researchers vs. clinician educators using Bolman and Deal's (B&D) four frames of organization (structural, human resource, political, symbolic). The authors then identified organizational approaches and activities that align with each B&D frame and proposed practical strategies to empower clinician-educators in their scholarly endeavors. RESULTS: Our medical education enterprise enhanced the structural frame by creating a decentralized medical education unit, incorporated the human resource component with an endowed chair to support faculty development, leveraged the political model by providing grant supports and expanding venues for scholarship, and enhanced the symbolic frame by endorsing the value of education and public recognition from leaderships. In five years, we saw an increased number of faculty interested in becoming clinician-educators, had an increased number of faculty winning Educational Awards for Excellence and delivering conference presentations, and received 12 of the 15 college-wide awards for educational scholarship. These satisfactory trends reflect early success of our educational enterprise. CONCLUSIONS: B&D's organizational frames can be used to identify strategies for addressing the pressing need to promote and recognize clinician-educators' scholarship. We realize that our situation is unique in several respects, but this approach is flexible within an institution and transferable to any other institution and its medical education program. ABBREVIATIONS: B&D: Bolman and Deal; CRIS: Center for Research, Innovation, and Scholarship; OOR: Office of Research.

Twelve tips for developing, implementing, and sustaining medical education fellowship programs: Building on new trends and solid foundations.

Medical education fellowship programs (MEFPs) are a form of faculty development contributing to an organization's educational mission and participants' career development. Building an MEFP requires a systematic design, implementation, and evaluation approach which aligns institutional and individual faculty goals. Implementing an MEFP requires a team of committed individuals who provide expertise, guidance, and mentoring. Qualified MEFP directors should utilize instructional methods that promote individual and institutional short and long term growth. Directors must balance the use of traditional design, implementation, and evaluation methodologies with advancing trends that may support or threaten the acceptability and sustainability of the program. Drawing on the expertise of 28 MEFP directors, we provide twelve tips as a guide to those implementing, sustaining, and/or growing a successful MEFP whose value is demonstrated by its impacts on participants, learners, patients, teaching faculty, institutions, the greater medical education community, and the population's health.

Perspectives from a pediatrician about diagnostic errors.

This opinion paper provides perspectives from a pediatrician about diagnostic challenges in caring for children. This essay shares personal experiences and lessons learned from a pediatric hospitalist about caring for children and making errors in diagnosis. This piece offers guidance about how to teach medical learners key concepts about error in diagnosis with underscoring the importance of developing critical thinking skills. Finally, the author offers tips from the literature about how physicians and other care providers can reorganize their own thinking (metacognition) to address their clinical practice.

Diagnosing diagnostic error.

Diagnostic errors are the most common errors in primary care. Diagnostic errors have been found to be the leading cause of malpractice litigation, accounting for twice as many claims and settled cases as medication errors. Diagnostic error is common, harmful, costly, and very critical to the patient-safety issues in health care. Diagnostic errors have received relatively little attention, however. Of what is known, diagnostic errors are an important source of preventable harm. Focused research in this area is highly needed because the causes of diagnostic errors are subtle and solutions are less obvious than for other types of errors. As opposed to medication errors, where the factors predisposing to their occurrence and the resultant preventive strategies are better defined, the relationship between factors influencing the diagnostic reasoning or decision making and a diagnostic error are not as clear. This may include any failure in timely access to care; elicitation or interpretation of symptoms, signs, or laboratory results, formulation and weighing of differential diagnosis; and timely follow-up and specialty referral or evaluation. The literature reveals that diagnostic errors are often caused by the combination of cognitive errors and system failure. Increased understanding about diagnostic decision making, sources of errors, and applying some existing strategies into clinical practice would help clinicians reduce these types of errors and encourage more optimal diagnostic processes.