Equity and Justice in Family Medicine Clinical Care and Teaching Must Incorporate a Reproductive Justice Framework.

Since European settlement, the United States has controlled the reproduction of communities of color through tactics ranging from forced pregnancies, sterilizations, and abortions to immigration policies and policies that separate children from their families. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (or questioning), asexual, intersex, and gender diverse people (LGBTQIA+) have been persecuted for sexual behavior and gender expression, and also restricted from having children. In response, women of color and LGBTQIA+ communities have organized for Reproductive Justice (RJ) and liberation. The Reproductive Justice framework, conceived in 1994 by the Women of African Descent for Reproductive Justice, addresses the reproductive health needs of Black women and communities from a broad human rights perspective. Since then, the framework has expanded with an intersectional approach to include all communities of color and LGBTQIA+ communities. Notwithstanding, reproductive injustice negatively impacts the health of already marginalized and oppressed communities, which is reflected in higher rates of maternal mortality, infant mortality, infertility, preterm births, and poorer health outcomes associated with race-based stress. While the impact of racial injustice on disparate health outcomes is increasingly addressed in family medicine, Reproductive Justice has not been universally incorporated into care provision or education. Including the RJ framework in family medicine education is critical to understanding how structural, economic, and political factors influence health outcomes to improve health care delivery from a justice and human rights perspective. This commentary describes how an RJ framework can enhance medical education and care provision, and subsequently identifies strategies for incorporating Reproductive Justice teaching into family medicine education.

Building an Equity-Centered Ecosystem: University of Utah Health as a Microcosm.

Academic medicine, and medicine in general, are less diverse than the general patient population. Family Medicine, while still lagging behind the general population, has the most diversity in leadership and in the specialty in general, and continues to lead in this effort, with 16.7% of chairs identifying as underrepresented in medicine. Historical and current systematic marginalization of Black or African American, Latina/e/o/x, Hispanic or of Spanish Origin (LHS), American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Southeast Asian individuals has created severe underrepresentation within health sciences professions. Over the last 30 years, the percentage of faculty from these groups has increased from 7 to 9% in allopathic academic medicine, with similar increases in Osteopathic Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmacy, but all lag behind age-adjusted population means. Traditionally, diversity efforts have focused on increasing pathway programs to address this widening disparity. While pathway programs are a good start, they are only a portion of what is needed to create lasting change in the diversity of the medical profession as well as the career trajectory and success of underrepresented in medicine (URiM) health professionals toward self-actualization and positions of leadership. This article elucidates all parts of an ecosystem necessary to ensure that equity, diversity, and inclusion outcomes can improve.

Are committee experiences of minoritized family medicine faculty part of the minority tax? a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because much of the work in academic medicine is done by committee, early career URiM faculty, are often asked to serve on multiple committees, including diversity work that may not be recognized as important. They may also be asked to serve on committees to satisfy a diversity "check box," and may be asked more often than their non-URiM peers to serve in this capacity. We sought to describe the committee experiences of early career URiM faculty, hypothesizing that they may see committee service as a minority tax. METHODS: Participants in the Leadership through Scholarship Fellowship (LTSF) were asked to share their experiences with committee service in their careers after participating in a faculty development discussion. Their responses were analyzed and reported using qualitative, open, axial, and abductive reasoning methods. RESULTS: Four themes, with eight sub-themes (in parenthesis), emerged from the content analysis of the LTSF fellows responses to the prompt: Time commitment (Timing of committee work and lack of protected time for research and scholarship), URiM Committee service (Expectation that URiM person will serve on committees and consequences for not serving), Mentoring issues (no mentoring regarding committee service, faculty involvement is lacking and the conflicting nature of committee work) and Voice (Lack of voice or acknowledgement). CONCLUSIONS: Early career URiM faculty reported an expectation of serving on committees and consequences for not serving related to their identity, but other areas of committee service they shared were not connected to their URiM identity. Because most of the experiences were not connected to the LTSF fellows' URiM identity, this group has identified areas of committee service that may affect all early career faculty. More research is necessary to determine how committee service affects URiM and non-URiM faculty in academic family medicine.

Evaluating Diabetes Group Medical Visits in a Family Medicine Residency Program.

Background: Group medical visits (GMV) have been shown to improve metrics in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Overlook Family Medicine, a teaching residency program, anticipated that medical residents trained in the GMV model of care by interdisciplinary team members may improve cholesterol, HbA1C, BMI, and blood pressure in patients. The objective of this study was to compare metrics between group 1: GMV patients with DM whose primary care provider (PCP) was an attending physician/nurse practitioner (NP) and group 2: GMV patients with DM whose PCP was a family medicine (FM) medical resident receiving GMV training. We seek to provide guidance on implementation of GMV in residency teaching practices. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, TG, BMI, HbA1C, and BP in GMV patients between 2015-2018. We used a t test to compare outcomes between the two groups. Diabetes training was provided to family medicine residents by an interdisciplinary team. Results: There were 113 patients enrolled in the study: 53 in group 1 and 60 in group 2. There was a statistically significant decrease in LDL and triglycerides, and an increase in HDL in group 2 (P<.05). There was a clinically significant decrease in HbA1C in group 2 (-0.56, P=.0622). Conclusion: Sustainability of GMV can be achieved with a champion diabetes education specialist. Interdisciplinary team members are integral in training residents and addressing patients' barriers. GMV training should be incorporated into family medicine residency programs to improve metrics for patients with diabetes. FM residents who received interdisciplinary training had improved metrics in GMV patients compared to patients whose providers did not. Therefore, GMV training should be incorporated into family medicine residency programs to improve metrics for patients with diabetes.

What Do Underrepresented in Medicine Junior Family Medicine Faculty Value From a Faculty Development Experience?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: While there is increased attention to underrepresented in medicine (URiM) faculty and students, little is known about what they value in faculty development experiences. METHODS: We performed a URiM-focused, 3-day family medicine faculty development program and then collected program evaluation forms. The program evaluations had open-ended questions and a reflection on the activity. We used inductive open coding using NVivo software. We analyzed open-ended responses and reflections, and identified themes. RESULTS: Seven participants provided reflections on the workshop and responses to the evaluation forms. Analysis revealed four major themes in the learners' responses and reflections: (1) personalizing learning, (2) impacting career trajectories, (3) clarifying the writing process, and (4) creating a safe place, with frequencies of 28.2%, 26.7%, 23.6%, and 20.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although this faculty development experience was designed to teach writing skills to URiM junior faculty, their collective responses indicate that they found value beyond the skills taught and appreciated the approach taken in this activity.

Towards a common lexicon for equity, diversity, and inclusion work in academic medicine.

Differential rewarding of work and experience has been a longtime feature of academic medicine, resulting in a series of academic disparities. These disparities have been collectively called a cultural or minority "tax," and, when considered beyond academic medicine, exist across all departments, colleges, and schools of institutions of higher learning-from health sciences to disciplines located on university campuses outside of medicine and health. A shared language can provide opportunities for those who champion this work to pool resources for larger impacts across the institution. This article aims to catalog the terms used across academic medicine disciplines to establish a common language describing the inequities experienced by Black, Latinx, American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, Women, and other underrepresented people as well as queer, disabled, and other historically marginalized or excluded groups. These ideas are specific to academic medicine in the United States, although many can be used in academic medicine in other countries. The terms were selected by a team of experts in equity, diversity, and inclusion, (EDI) who are considered national thought leaders in EDI and collectively have over 100 years of scholarship and experience in this area.

Implementing High-Quality Primary Care Through a Health Equity Lens.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of centering health equity in future health system and primary care reforms. Strengthening primary care will be needed to correct the longstanding history of mistreatment of First Nations/Indigenous and racialized people, exclusion of health care workers of color, and health care access and outcome inequities further magnified by the COVID-19 pandemic. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) released a report on Implementing High-Quality Primary Care: Rebuilding the Foundation of Health Care, that provided a framework for defining high-quality primary care and proposed 5 recommendations for implementing that definition. Using the report's framework, we identified health equity challenges and opportunities with examples from primary care systems in the United States and Canada. We are poised to reinvigorate primary care because the recent pandemic and the attention to continued racialized police violence sparked renewed conversations and collaborations around equity, diversity, inclusion, and health equity that have been long overdue. The time to transition those conversations to actionable items to improve the health of patients, families, and communities is now.Appeared as Annals "Online First" article.

Submit It Again! Learning From Rejected Manuscripts.

Rejection of manuscripts by academic journals can be devastating for the early-career family medicine faculty members. Taking experience from teaching early-career underrepresented in medicine faculty members writing and scholarship skills, we identify and explain five lessons to be learned from rejected manuscripts. The five lessons are: (1) rejections teach journal scope, (2) rejections teach process, (3) rejection should lead to resubmission, (4) rejections reflect writing effort, and (5) rejections happen to papers, not authors. Early-career family medicine faculty can use these lessons for reassurance and to adapt behaviors to remain in the scholarship arena.

An Approach to Faculty Development for Underrepresented Minorities in Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: The diversity of the US physician workforce lags significantly behind the population, and the disparities in academic medicine are even greater, with underrepresented in medicine (URM) physicians accounting for only 6.8% of all US medical school faculty. We describe a "for URM by URM" pilot approach to faculty development for junior URM Family Medicine physicians that targets unique challenges faced by URM faculty. METHODS: A year-long fellowship was created for junior URM academic clinician faculty with funding through the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Project Fund. Seven junior faculty applied and were accepted to participate in the fellowship, which included conference calls and an in-person workshop covering topics related to writing and career advancement. RESULTS: The workshop included a mix of prepared programming on how to move from idea to project to manuscript, as well as time for spontaneous mentorship and manuscript collaboration. Key themes that emerged included how to address the high cost of the minority tax, the need for individual passion as a pathway to success, and how to overcome imposter syndrome as a hindrance to writing. CONCLUSIONS: The "for URM by URM" approach for faculty development to promote writing skills and scholarship for junior URM Family Medicine physicians can address challenges faced by URM faculty. By using a framework that includes the mentors' lived experiences and creates a psychological safe space, we can address concerns often overlooked in traditional skills-based faculty development programs.

Dear White People.

We are living in unprecedented times. While the world is grappling with COVID-19, we find the horrors of racism looming equally large as we, yet again, confront lurid deaths in the center of the news cycle of Black and brown people from police bias and brutality. Those of us who have been championing antiracism and justice work and bearing the burden of the "minority tax" have been overwhelmed by sudden asks from our well-intentioned White colleagues of how to best respond. In the tone of the Netflix series, "Dear White People," we further emphasize that we are not alone in trying to reach out to you, our White colleagues and leaders. Please hear our story and heed our call to action.

Racism as Experienced by Physicians of Color in the Health Care Setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of racism experienced by physicians of color in the workplace. METHODS: We utilized a mixed-methods, cross-sectional, survey design. Seventy-one participants provided qualitative responses describing instances of racism from patients, colleagues, and their institutions. These responses were then coded in order to identify key domains and categories. Participants also completed quantitative measures of their professional quality of life and the incidence of microaggressions experienced while at work. RESULTS: We found that physicians of color were routinely exposed to instances of racism and discrimination while at work. Twenty-three percent of participants reported that a patient had directly refused their care specifically due to their race. Microaggressions experienced at work and symptoms of secondary traumatic stress were significantly correlated. The qualitative data revealed that a majority of participants experienced significant racism from their patients, colleagues, and institutions. Their ideas for improving diversity and inclusion in the workplace included providing spaces to openly discuss diversity work, constructing institutional policies that promote diversity, and creating intentional hiring practices that emphasize a more diverse workforce. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians of color are likely to experience significant racism while providing health care in their workplace settings, and they are likely to feel unsupported by their institutions when these experiences occur. Institutions seeking a more equitable workplace environment should intentionally include diversity and inclusion as part of their effort.

Randomized comparison of 3 methods to screen for domestic violence in family practice.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to compare 3 ways of administering brief domestic violence screening questionnaires: self-administered questionnaire, medical staff interview, and physician interview. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial of 3 screening protocols for domestic violence in 4 urban family medicine practices with mostly minority patients. We randomly assigned 523 female patients, aged 18 years or older and currently involved with a partner, to 1 of 3 screening protocols. Each included 2 brief screening tools: HITS and WAST-Short. Outcome measures were domestic violence disclosure, patient and clinician comfort with the screening, and time spent screening. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of domestic violence was 14%. Most patients (93.4%) and clinicians (84.5%) were comfortable with the screening questions and method of administering them. Average time spent screening was 4.4 minutes. Disclosure rates, patient and clinician comfort with screening, and time spent screening were similar among the 3 protocols. In addition, WAST-Short was validated in this sample of minority women by comparison with HITS and with the 8-item WAST. CONCLUSIONS: Domestic violence is common, and we found that most patients and clinicians are comfortable with domestic violence screening in urban family medicine settings. Patient self-administered domestic violence screening is as effective as clinician interview in terms of disclosure, comfort, and time spent screening.