Perception of Medical Student Mistreatment: Does Specialty Matter?

PURPOSE: Medical student mistreatment is pervasive, yet whether all physicians have a shared understanding of the problem is unclear. The authors presented professionally designed trigger videos to physicians from 6 different specialties to determine if they perceive mistreatment and its severity similarly. METHOD: From October 2016 to August 2018, resident and attending physicians from 10 U.S. medical schools viewed 5 trigger videos showing behaviors that could be perceived as mistreatment. They completed a survey exploring their perceptions. The authors compared perceptions of mistreatment across specialties and, for each scenario, evaluated the relationship between specialty and perception of mistreatment. RESULTS: Six-hundred fifty resident and attending physicians participated. There were statistically significant differences in perception of mistreatment across specialties for 3 of the 5 scenarios: aggressive questioning (range, 74.1%-91.2%), negative feedback (range, 25.4%-63.7%), and assignment of inappropriate tasks (range, 5.5%-25.5%) (P ≤ .001, for all). After adjusting for gender, race, professional role, and prior mistreatment, physicians in surgery viewed 3 scenarios (aggressive questioning, negative feedback, and inappropriate tasks) as less likely to represent mistreatment compared with internal medicine physicians. Physicians from obstetrics-gynecology and "other" specialties perceived less mistreatment in 2 scenarios (aggressive questioning and negative feedback), while family physicians perceived more mistreatment in 1 scenario (negative feedback) compared with internal medicine physicians. The mean severity of perceived mistreatment on a 1 to 7 scale (7 most serious) also varied statistically significantly across the specialties for 3 scenarios: aggressive questioning (range, 4.4-5.4; P < .001), ethnic insensitivity (range, 5.1-6.1; P = .001), and sexual harassment (range, 5.5-6.3; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Specialty was associated with differences in the perception of mistreatment and rating of its severity. Further investigation is needed to understand why these perceptions of mistreatment vary among specialties and how to address these differences.

Evolving roles of clerkship directors: have expectations changed?

BACKGROUND: Physician educators directing medical student programs face increasingly more complex challenges to ensure students receive appropriate preparation to care for patients. The Alliance for Clinical Education (ACE) defined expectations of and for clerkship directors in 2003. Since then, much has changed in medical education and health care. METHODS: ACE conducted a panel discussion at the 2016 Association of American Medical Colleges Learn Serve Lead conference, soliciting input on these expectations and the changing roles of clerkship directors. Using workshops as a cross-sectional study design, participants reacted to roles and responsibilities of clerkship directors identified in the literature using an audience response system and completing worksheets. RESULTS: The participants represented different disciplines of medicine and ranged from clerkship directors to deans of curriculum. Essential clerkship director qualifications identified by participants included: enthusiasm, experience teaching, and clinical expertise. Essential tasks included grading and assessment and attention to accreditation standards. Participants felt clerkship directors need adequate resources, including budget oversight, full-time clerkship support, and dedicated time to be the clerkship director. To whom clerkship directors report was mixed. Clerkship directors look to their chair for career advice, and they also report to the dean to ensure educational standards are being met. Expectations to meet accreditation standards and provide exemplary educational experiences can be difficult to achieve if clerkship directors' time and resources are limited. CONCLUSIONS: Participant responses indicated the need for a strong partnership between department chairs and the dean's office so that clerkship directors can fulfill their responsibilities. Our results indicate a need to ensure clerkship directors have the time and resources necessary to manage clinical medical student education in an increasingly complex health care environment. Further studies need to be conducted to obtain more precise data on the true amount of time they are given to do that role.

Competency-Based Medical Education in the Internal Medicine Clerkship: A Report From the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Undergraduate Medical Education Task Force.

As medical educators continue to redefine learning and assessment across the continuum, implementation of competency-based medical education in the undergraduate setting has become a focus of many medical schools. While standards of competency have been defined for the graduating student, there is no uniform approach for defining competency expectations for students during their core clerkship year. The authors describe the process by which an Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine task force developed a paradigm for competency-based assessment of students during their inpatient internal medicine (IM) clerkship. Building on work at the resident and fellowship levels, the task force focused on the development of key learning outcomes as defined by entrustable professional activities (EPAs) that were specific to educational experiences on the IM clerkship, as well as identification of high-priority assessment domains. The work was informed by a national survey of clerkship directors.Six key EPAs emerged: generating a differential diagnosis, obtaining a complete and accurate history and physical exam, obtaining focused histories and clinically relevant physical exams, preparing an oral presentation, interpreting the results of basic diagnostic studies, and providing well-organized clinical documentation. A model for assessment was proposed, with descriptors aligned to the scale of supervision and mapped to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education domains of competence. The proposed paradigm offers a standardized template that may be used across IM clerkships, and which would effectively bridge competency evaluation in the clerkship to fourth-year assessment as well as eventual postgraduate training.

Biomedical Science Undergraduate Major: A New Pathway to Advance Research and the Health Professions.

PROBLEM: Many students entering professional degree programs, particularly M.D., Ph.D., and M.D./Ph.D., are not well prepared regarding the breadth of scientific knowledge required, communication skills, research experience, reading and understanding the scientific literature, and significant shadowing (for M.D.-related professions). In addition, physician scientists are a needed and necessary part of the academic research environment but are dwindling in numbers. INTERVENTION: In response to predictions of critical shortages of clinician investigators and the lack of proper preparation as undergraduates for these professions, the Biomedical Science (BMS) undergraduate major was created at The Ohio State University to attract incoming college freshmen with interests in scientific research and the healthcare professions. The intent of this major was to graduate an elite cohort of highly talented individuals who would pursue careers in the healthcare professions, biomedical research, or both. CONTEXT: Students were admitted to the BMS major through an application and interview process. Admitted cohorts were small, comprising 22 to 26 students, and received a high degree of individualized professional academic advising and mentoring. The curriculum included a minimum of 4 semesters (or 2 years) of supervised research experience designed to enable students to gain skills in clinical and basic science investigation. In addition to covering the prerequisites for medicine and advanced degrees in health professions, the integrated BMS coursework emphasized research literacy as well as skills related to work as a healthcare professional, with additional emphasis on independent learning, teamwork to solve complex problems, and both oral and written communication skills. Supported by Ohio State's Department of Internal Medicine, a unique clinical internship provided selected students with insights into potential careers as physician scientists. OUTCOME: In this educational case report, we describe the BMS undergraduate major and its outcomes after 10 years of implementation. Major outcomes include the strength of the major's matriculates (average ACT score = 32.6; average high school class percentile rank = 95.5) and the high percentage of BMS students who pursued graduate/professional degrees (91%; n = 110). Other markers of success include the strong focus on research, which resulted in 120 articles published by graduates to date (range = 0-12/student; 43% with at least 1 peer-reviewed journal article). LESSONS LEARNED: Based on its successes, adoption of a similar program at other academic medical centers would help feed the pipeline of well-trained health professionals and biomedical researchers.

Coaching the Coach: A Program for Development of Faculty Portfolio Coaches.

PROBLEM: Faculty coaching is recognized as an essential element for effective use of portfolios in undergraduate medical education, yet best practices for training these coaches are uncertain. INTERVENTION: New portfolio coaches participated in a multifaceted training program that included orienting modules, a 7.5-hr training workshop featuring analysis of reflective writing, an Observed Structured Teaching Exercise (OSTE), and subsequent longitudinal coaches' meetings for timely task training. Four desired coaching skills were emphasized in the initial training: creating a safe environment, explicitly using performance data, asking questions that elicit reflection, and guiding the student to develop future goals and plans. We collected and analyzed several outcomes: (a) coaches' self-assessment at key intervals, (b) open-ended written responses to three coaching vignettes, (c) video recordings of the OSTE, and (d) subsequent student evaluation of the coach. In an attempt to capture learning from the workshop, both the responses to written vignettes and the video-recorded encounters were coded for presence or absence of the four desired skills. CONTEXT: Our portfolio and coaching program was instituted as part of a major undergraduate medical education reform. A new cohort of 25 coaches is enrolled with each matriculating student class, and each coach is assigned to work individually with 8-10 students, forming a coaching relationship that continues over 4 years. Coaches are compensated at 5% full-time equivalent. OUTCOME: On coach self-assessment, the majority of coaches reported significant improvement in their perceived ability to assess a student's level of reflection, enhance reflection, use performance data, and guide a student to develop goals and plans. After two semesters, coach perception of improved abilities persisted. Students rated coaches as excellent (82%), reporting that coaches created safe environments (99%), promoted insight (92%), and aided in goal setting (97%). Written responses to vignettes before the OSTE found that several coaches omitted desired behaviors; however, posttraining responses showed no discernable pattern of learning. Coding of the OSTE, in contrast, documented that all coaches demonstrated all four of the desired skills. LESSONS LEARNED: Although coaches reported learning related to key skills, learning was not apparent when responses to written vignettes were examined. In contrast, skills were demonstrated in the OSTE, perhaps due to the added structured tasks as well as anticipation of feedback. In conclusion, this portfolio coach training program achieved its desired aim of providing students with portfolio coaches who demonstrated the desired skills, as reported by both coaches and students.

The IDEA Assessment Tool: Assessing the Reporting, Diagnostic Reasoning, and Decision-Making Skills Demonstrated in Medical Students' Hospital Admission Notes.

UNLABELLED: Construct: Clinical skills are used in the care of patients, including reporting, diagnostic reasoning, and decision-making skills. Written comprehensive new patient admission notes (H&Ps) are a ubiquitous part of student education but are underutilized in the assessment of clinical skills. The interpretive summary, differential diagnosis, explanation of reasoning, and alternatives (IDEA) assessment tool was developed to assess students' clinical skills using written comprehensive new patient admission notes. BACKGROUND: The validity evidence for assessment of clinical skills using clinical documentation following authentic patient encounters has not been well documented. Diagnostic justification tools and postencounter notes are described in the literature (1,2) but are based on standardized patient encounters. To our knowledge, the IDEA assessment tool is the first published tool that uses medical students' H&Ps to rate students' clinical skills. APPROACH: The IDEA assessment tool is a 15-item instrument that asks evaluators to rate students' reporting, diagnostic reasoning, and decision-making skills based on medical students' new patient admission notes. This study presents validity evidence in support of the IDEA assessment tool using Messick's unified framework, including content (theoretical framework), response process (interrater reliability), internal structure (factor analysis and internal-consistency reliability), and relationship to other variables. RESULTS: Validity evidence is based on results from four studies conducted between 2010 and 2013. First, the factor analysis (2010, n = 216) yielded a three-factor solution, measuring patient story, IDEA, and completeness, with reliabilities of .79, .88, and .79, respectively. Second, an initial interrater reliability study (2010) involving two raters demonstrated fair to moderate consensus (κ = .21-.56, ρ =.42-.79). Third, a second interrater reliability study (2011) with 22 trained raters also demonstrated fair to moderate agreement (intraclass correlations [ICCs] = .29-.67). There was moderate reliability for all three skill domains, including reporting skills (ICC = .53), diagnostic reasoning skills (ICC = .64), and decision-making skills (ICC = .63). Fourth, there was a significant correlation between IDEA rating scores (2010-2013) and final Internal Medicine clerkship grades (r = .24), 95% confidence interval (CI) [.15, .33]. CONCLUSIONS: The IDEA assessment tool is a novel tool with validity evidence to support its use in the assessment of students' reporting, diagnostic reasoning, and decision-making skills. The moderate reliability achieved supports formative or lower stakes summative uses rather than high-stakes summative judgments.

Do attending physicians, nurses, residents, and medical students agree on what constitutes medical student abuse?

BACKGROUND: Whether attending physicians, residents, nurses, and medical students agree on what constitutes medical student abuse, its severity, or influencing factors is unknown. METHOD: We surveyed 237 internal medicine attending physicians, residents, medical students, and nurses at 13 medical schools after viewing five vignettes depicting potentially abusive behaviors. RESULTS: The majority of each group felt the belittlement, ethnic insensitivity, and sexual harassment scenarios represented abuse but that excluding a student from participating in a procedure did not. Only a majority of attending physicians considered the negative feedback scenario as abuse. Medical students rated abuse severity significantly lower than other groups in the belittlement scenario (p<.05). Respondents who felt abused as students were more likely to rate behaviors as abusive (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The groups generally agree on what constitutes abuse, but attending physicians and those abused as students may perceive more behaviors as abusive.