Development of a novel healthcare discrimination measure: PreDict.

Introduction: Patient reported quality of care measures are widely recognized tools for healthcare system performance assessment. Yet, there are few existing patient reported quality of care measures regarding health equity, and none to specifically collect patient experiences of discrimination in health care. Objective: To develop an item pool to measure patient experiences of healthcare discrimination-the Patient-Reported Experiences of Discrimination in Care Tool (PreDict). Methods: Utilizing a multistage, exploratory sequential mixed methods study design, we conducted qualitative interviews (n=73) and expert panel consensus analysis to develop items to capture patient experiences of discrimination. This process plus systematic literature review identified extant items and informed de novo items for inclusion in the item pool. Items were developed in English and Spanish and were not represented by extant items. Following identification of the initial item pool (n=125), candidate items underwent cognitive interview testing with English (n=113) and Spanish (n=70) speaking participants to evaluate items for clarity and comprehensiveness. English and Spanish items were also evaluated by a bilingual expert panel to recommend pool items for inpatient field testing. Results: One hundred and three items underwent cognitive interview testing and fifty-nine items were retained. Lack of clarity was the most cited factor for removal or revision of items. Expert panel review resulted in the removal of one additional item and the revision of seven items.Fifty-eight candidate items were retained for inclusion in field testing and future analyses using item response theory modeling. Conclusion: PreDict fills an important gap in measurement of discrimination, which is known to influence patient health outcomes. Development and testing to date demonstrate evidence of validity in characterizing the complex phenomenon of healthcare discrimination.

The Association of Microaggressions with Depressive Symptoms and Institutional Satisfaction Among a National Cohort of Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial research on medical student mistreatment, there is scant quantitative data on microaggressions in US medical education. OBJECTIVE: To assess US medical students' experiences of microaggressions and how these experiences influenced students' mental health and medical school satisfaction. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of US medical students' experiences of microaggressions. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a positive depression screen on the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Medical school satisfaction was a secondary outcome. We used logistic regression to model the association between respondents' reported microaggression frequency and the likelihood of a positive PHQ-2 screen. For secondary outcomes, we used the chi-squared statistic to test associations between microaggression exposure and medical school satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: Out of 759 respondents, 61% experienced at least one microaggression weekly. Gender (64.4%), race/ethnicity (60.5%), and age (40.9%) were the most commonly cited reasons for experiencing microaggressions. Increased microaggression frequency was associated with a positive depression screen in a dose-response relationship, with second, third, and fourth (highest) quartiles of microaggression frequency having odds ratios of 2.71 (95% CI: 1-7.9), 3.87 (95% CI: 1.48-11.05), and 9.38 (95% CI: 3.71-26.69), relative to the first quartile. Medical students who experienced at least one microaggression weekly were more likely to consider medical school transfer (14.5% vs 4.7%, p<0.001) and withdrawal (18.2% vs 5.7%, p<0.001) and more likely to believe microaggressions were a normal part of medical school culture (62.3% vs 32.1%) compared to students who experienced microaggressions less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest study on the experiences and influences of microaggressions among a national sample of US medical students. Our major findings were that microaggressions are frequent occurrences and that the experience of microaggressions was associated with a positive depression screening and decreased medical school satisfaction.

Assessment of internal medicine trainee sign-out quality and utilization habits.

Transfers of care have been associated with adverse events. High quality sign-out may help mitigate this risk. The authors sought to characterize the clinical questions asked of physicians covering patients overnight and to determine the adequacy of current sign-out practice to anticipate inquiries. The authors conducted a prospective, self-report study of interns' overnight experience at two hospitals. We collected data from novice interns (July 7-August 3, 2010) and experienced interns (March 2-March 29, 2011) in an Internal Medicine residency program. Interns recorded information about overnight inquiries regarding cross-covered patients. For each inquiry about a patient, the intern was asked to record what the situation was about, who initiated the contact, where the intern found the desired information, whether all required data was located, whether the call could have been anticipated by the primary team, if so, whether the call was anticipated, whether the sign-out was sufficient, the time required to address the question, and whether the patient was physically visited. Twenty-one interns (13 novice, 8 experienced) reported 167 overnight inquiries. Most were from nursing staff (87%) about a wide range of topics, with orders (25%) and plan of care (20%) being most common. Trainees used the oral or written sign-out to answer 56% of inquiries. The proportion of inquiries successfully anticipated (47% overall) significantly decreased as the academic year progressed (AOR = 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.8). Trainees rely on sign-out to answer nearly half of overnight inquiries, but the quality of sign-out may decrease over the course of the academic year. The deterioration of sign-out quality from novice to experienced interns and the common use of sign-out as a reference by covering interns suggest continued education, support and oversight by supervising physicians may be beneficial.

Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress among survivors of the 2005 Pakistani earthquake.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the prevalence of psychological morbidity among survivors of the 2005 northern Pakistan earthquake from Azad Kashmir and the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among randomly sampled survivors (N = 361) of the earthquake living in camps at the time of the interview, approximately 6 months after the earthquake. RESULTS: The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in the total sample was 51.5% and the prevalence of individuals who received positive scores on the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) was 75%. The prevalence rates for anxiety and depression symptoms were 77.3% and 70.9%, respectively. The prevalence in Azad Kashmir was 57.9% for PTSD and 79.8% for positive HSCL, and NWFP had 41.3% PTSD and 67.4% positive HSCL. Study subjects from Azad Kashmir were approximately 2 times as likely to have PTSD or a positive HSCL when compared to subjects from NWFP (odds ratio 1.95, confidence interval 1.27-3.0; P = .0024) and (odds ratio 1.91, confidence interval 1.18-3.1; P = .0085), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of the northern Pakistan earthquake survivors had symptoms of PTSD. Six months after the incident, more than three-fourths exhibited symptoms of an anxiety disorder.

Who's behind an HCAHPS score?

BACKGROUND: The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey asks patients how frequently their physicians treated them with courtesy and respect, listened carefully, and explained things in a way they could understand. Such summary reports may obscure differences among the types of physicians involved. A study was conducted to examine the association between ratings for different physician types and the overall HCAHPS rating of physicians. METHODS: A mixed-methods study included closed-ended surveys and in-depth interviews of patients on a hospitalist teaching service. The three HCAHPS physician communication items were used to interview patients about their communication experiences with emergency medicine (EM) physicians, hospitalists, and specialists. The association between the overall score and the scores of each physician type was examined using Spearman correlation coefficients and linear regression. Qualitative data from additional in-depth interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify recurrent themes. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were recruited for the survey, and additional in-depth interviews were conducted with the first 30 patients. Hospitalist and specialist scores were significantly associated (p values < .05) with overall scores. Recurrent themes regarding determinants of patients' ratings were categorized in three broad domains: individual physician behavior, team communication, and system issues. The influence of each domain differed across physician types. DISCUSSION: Physician communication scores may be most strongly influenced by patient experiences with hospitalists and specialists rather than with EM physicians. Several team communication and system issues represent opportunities for improving physician communication.