Navigating Uncertainty in Clinical Practice: A Structured Approach.

The practice of clinical medicine is imbued with uncertainty. The ways in which clinicians and patients think about, communicate about, and act within situations of heightened uncertainty can have significant implications for the therapeutic alliance and for the trajectory and outcomes of clinical care. Despite this, there is limited guidance about the best methods for physicians to recognize, acknowledge, communicate about, and manage uncertainty in clinical settings. In this paper, we propose a structured approach for discussing and managing uncertainty within the context of a clinician-patient relationship. The approach involves four steps: Recognize, Acknowledge, Partner, and Seek Support (i.e., the RAPS framework). The approach is guided by existing literature on uncertainty as well as our own experience as clinicians working at different stages of career. We define each component of the approach and present sample language and actions for how to implement it in practice. Our aim is to empower clinicians to regard situations of high uncertainty as an opportunity to deepen the therapeutic alliance with the patient, and simultaneously to grow and learn as practitioners.

Finding and doing what matters most: Five productivity strategies for physicians in academic medicine.

While structural change is needed to address the burnout epidemic among healthcare workers, it is important for physicians to avail themselves of the many productivity strategies that can help them succeed in navigating the multiple responsibilities of academic medicine. We present here 5 key strategies within our control that can help increase productivity in the pursuit of work in academic medicine that is meaningful and sustainable: (1) Clarify Priorities, (2) Track Tasks Systematically, (3) Focus and Monotask, (4) Invest in Timesavers, and (5) Celebrate Successes. The specific tools listed under each strategy may help academic physicians feel grounded and maintain our focus on doing meaningful work. While system-wide culture change around expectations, and institutional support for physician wellbeing, is more critical than ever, individual physicians can still benefit from learning strategies to prioritize, track, focus on, delegate and celebrate the work that matters to us in our lives.

Association Between Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Medical Specialties and Residency Application Rates.

Importance: The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in the US medical profession is a well-recognized problem, and racial and ethnic representation is highly variable across the medical specialties. Residency selection is a crucial juncture at which diversity and representation in specialties can be increased. Objective: To identify factors associated with residency application rates for medical specialties by race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national cross-sectional study of medical student residency applications used American Association of Medical Colleges data on 2019-2020 applicants and information about the racial and ethnic characteristics of practicing physicians (including medical school faculty) and department chairs. A total of 26 320 applicants to medical residency programs, 592 296 practicing physicians, and 2121 department chairs across the US were included. Residency application rates for 18 medical specialties were evaluated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the specialty representation quotient (SRQ), which estimated the extent to which students from a racial or ethnic group were overrepresented (an SRQ >1) or underrepresented (an SRQ <1) in a given specialty compared with the racial and ethnic demographic characteristics of the corresponding graduating class. Covariates included the racial and ethnic demographic characteristics of practicing physicians and department chairs by specialty based on American Association of Medical Colleges data and student academic factors (mean United States Medical Licensing Examination step 1 score, number of research experiences, and AΩA honor society membership among matched students from the previous application cycle). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations between these covariates and application rates by race and ethnicity. Results: Among 26 320 specialty-specific applications to medical residency programs in 18 specialties, 90 (0.3%) were from American Indian or Alaska Native students, 6718 (25.5%) were from Asian students, 2575 (9.8%) were from Black students, 1896 (7.2%) were from Hispanic students, and 15 041 (57.1%) were from White students. Among 592 296 practicing physicians, 2777 (0.5%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 117 358 (19.8%) were Asian, 36 639 (6.2%) were Black, 41 071 (6.9%) were Hispanic, and 394 451 (66.6%) were White. Among 2121 department chairs, 5 (0.2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 212 (10.0%) were Asian, 86 (4.1%) were Black, 88 (4.1%) were Hispanic, and 1730 (81.6%) were White. The specialties with the greatest representation among applicants from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine (URM) were family medicine (SRQ, 1.70), physical medicine and rehabilitation (SRQ, 1.60), and obstetrics and gynecology (SRQ, 1.47). The specialties with the lowest URM representation among applicants were plastic surgery (SRQ, 0.47), otolaryngology (SRQ, 0.53), and orthopedic surgery (SRQ, 0.86). Membership in AΩA was negatively associated with SRQ among American Indian or Alaska Native students only (ß = -0.11; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.05; P = .002). Racial and ethnic representation among practicing physicians was positively associated with SRQ for American Indian or Alaska Native students (ß = 6.05; 95% CI, 4.26-7.85; P < .001), Asian students (ß = 0.07; 95% CI, 0.06-0.09; P < .001), Black students (ß = 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.15; P < .001), and URM students overall (ß = 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.08; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest that the propensity of medical students, particularly those from racial and ethnic minority groups, to apply to a given specialty for residency was associated with the representation of their racial or ethnic group among the specialty's practicing physicians. Future work to characterize the mechanisms of occupational sorting may guide interventions to improve equity within the physician workforce.

Association Between Alcohol Intake and Prostate Specific Antigen Screening: Results From a National Behavioral Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between self-reported alcohol use and prostate cancer (PCa) screening using the U.S.-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of men aged between 55 and 69 who responded to the PSA screening and alcohol consumption portions of the 2018 BRFSS survey was performed. Alcohol consumption was assessed according with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition of binge and heavy drinking. Rates of PSA screening between binge and non-binge drinkers and among heavy and non-heavy drinkers were compared. A complex weighted multivariable logistic regression model, adjusted for socio-economic covariates and weighted using BRFSS sample weights, was used to test the association between the self-reported alcohol use and the odds of PSA screening. RESULTS: Among 57,774 men eligible for PCa screening, there were 8,276 binge drinkers with an unadjusted PSA screening prevalence of 37% versus 40% in the non-binge drinking group (P = .018). Among 3,836 heavy drinkers, the unadjusted PSA screening prevalence was 34% versus 40% in non-heavy drinkers (P < .001). In the multivariable analysis, only heavy drinking status was significantly associated with a lower odds of PSA screening (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Given that alcohol overuse may increase the risk of developing cancer, our finding of lower utilization of PCa screening among heavy drinkers is noteworthy. Efforts to support guideline-concordant cancer screening among heavy drinkers may represent an important strategy to reduce the burden of cancer in these men.

Diversity Is Not Enough: Advancing a Framework for Antiracism in Medical Education.

Medical students, residents, and faculty have begun to examine and grapple with the legacy and persistence of structural racism in academic medicine in the United States. Until recently, the discourse and solutions have largely focused on augmenting diversity across the medical education continuum through increased numbers of learners from groups underrepresented in medicine (UIM). Despite deliberate measures implemented by medical schools, residency programs, academic institutions, and national organizations, meaningful growth in diversity has not been attained. To the contrary, the UIM representation among medical trainees has declined or remained below the representation in the general population. Inequities continue to be observed in multiple domains of medical education, including grading, admission to honor societies, and extracurricular obligations. These inequities, alongside learners' experiences and calls for action, led the authors to conclude that augmenting diversity is necessary but insufficient to achieve equity in the learning environment. In this article, the authors advance a 4-step framework, built on established principles and practices of antiracism, to dismantle structural racism in medical education. They ground each step of the framework in the concepts and skills familiar to medical educators. By drawing parallels with clinical reasoning, medical error, continuous quality improvement, the growth mindset, and adaptive expertise, the authors show how learners, faculty, and academic leaders can implement the framework's 4 steps-see, name, understand, and act-to shift the paradigm from a goal of diversity to a stance of antiracism in medical education.

"Make the Implicit Explicit": Measuring Perceptions of Gender Bias and Creating a Gender Bias Curriculum for Internal Medicine Residents.

BACKGROUND: Gender bias in clinical training has been well established; however, little is known about how perceptions differ between men and women. Furthermore, few curricular options have been developed to discuss gender bias. OBJECTIVE: To measure the prevalence of gender bias, examine qualitative differences between men and women, and create a gender bias curriculum for internal medicine residents. METHODS: We surveyed 114 residents (response rate of 53.5%) to identify the prevalence and types of gender bias experienced in training. We compared estimates between genders and organized qualitative results into shared themes. We then developed a curriculum to promote and normalize discussions of gender bias. RESULTS: Among surveyed residents, 61% reported personal experiences of gender bias during training, with 98% of women and 19% of men reporting experiences when stratified by gender. We identified two domains in which gender bias manifested: role misidentification and a difficult working environment. Residents identified action items that led to the development of a gender bias curriculum. The curriculum includes didactic conferences and training sessions, a microaggression response toolkit, dinners for men and women residents, participation in a WhatsApp support group, and participation in academic projects related to gender bias in training. CONCLUSION: We confirmed a wide prevalence of gender bias and developed a scalable curriculum for gender bias training. Future work should explore the long-term impacts of these interventions.

Acute Care Utilization by Patients After Graduation of Their Resident Primary Care Physicians.

BACKGROUND: The disruption in provider continuity caused by medical resident graduation may result in adverse patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to investigate whether resident graduation was associated with increased acute care utilization by residents' primary care patients. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients cared for by junior and senior residents finishing the academic year in 2010, 2011 and 2012. MAIN MEASURES: We compared rates of clinic visits, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations between transitioning patients whose residents were graduating and non-transitioning patients whose residents were not graduating. KEY RESULTS: Our study population comprised 90 residents, 4018 unique patients, and 5988 resident-patient dyads that transitioned (n = 3136) or did not transition (n = 2852). For transitioning patients, the clinic visit rate per 100 patients in the 4 months before and after graduation was 129 and 102, respectively; for non-transitioning patients, the clinic visit rate was 119 and 94, respectively (difference-in-differences, +2 per 100 patients; p = 0.12). For transitioning patients, the ED visit rate per 100 patients before and after graduation was 29 and 26, respectively; for non-transitioning patients, the ED visit rate was 28 and 25, respectively (difference-in-differences, 0; p = 0.49). For transitioning patients, the hospitalization rate per 100 patients before and after graduation was 14 and 13, respectively; for non-transitioning patients, the hospitalization rate was 15 and 12, respectively (difference-in-differences, -2; p = 0.20). In multivariable modeling there was no increased risk for transitioning patients for clinic visits (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.03; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.10), ED visits (aRR, 1.05; 95 % CI, 0.92 to 1.20), or hospitalizations (aRR, 1.04; 95 % CI, 0.83 to 1.31). CONCLUSIONS: Acute care utilization by residents' patients did not increase or decrease after graduation. Acute care utilization was high before and after graduation. Interventions to decrease the need for acute care should be employed throughout the year.