RESUMO
Background: Outpatient follow-up represents a crucial opportunity to re-engage with gun violence survivors (GVS) and to facilitate positive health outcomes. Current outpatient models for firearm-related injuries and trauma care are inconsistent and unstandardized across trauma centers. This project describes the patient population served by the multidisciplinary Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL) Clinic for GVS. Also of primary interest was the outpatient follow-up services used by patients prior to their clinic appointment. Subsequent referrals placed during Clinic, as well as rate of attendance, was a secondary aim. Methods: This was a descriptive retrospective analysis of a quality improvement project of the TQoL Clinic. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record and were supplemented with information from the trauma registry and the hospital-based violence intervention program database. Descriptive statistics characterized the patient population served. A Χ2 analysis was used to compare no-show rates for the TQoL Clinic against two historical cohorts of trauma clinic attendees. Results: Most attendees were young (M=32.0, SD=1.8, range=15-88 years), Black (80.1%), and male (82.0%). Of the 306 total TQoL Clinic attendees, 82.3% attended their initial scheduled appointment. Most non-attendee patients rescheduled their appointments (92.1%), and 89.5% attended the rescheduled appointment. TQoL Clinic demonstrated a significantly lower no-show rate than the traditional trauma clinic model, including after the implementation of the hospital's inpatient violence intervention program (χ2(2)=75.52, p<0.001). Conclusion: The TQoL Clinic has demonstrated improved outpatient follow-up to address the comprehensive needs of GVS. Trauma centers with high gunshot wound volume should consider the implementation of the multidisciplinary TQoL Clinic model to increase access to care and to continue partnership with violence intervention programs to address health outcomes in those most at risk of future morbidity and mortality. Level of evidence: Therapeutic/care management, level III.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Deviation of an individual outside of gender normative stereotypes can limit hiring and promotion. The application, interview, and ranking process for medical students pursuing a general surgery residency has multiple opportunities for gender bias to affect an applicant's acceptance. This study examines medical students applying for a top academic general surgery residency and potential bias in perceived gender roles. METHODS: 269 medical students were interviewed for categorical positions at an academic general surgery residency. Applicants described themselves in one word; adjectives were compiled and categorized as grindstone, ability, communal, or agentic traits. Groups were compared across applicant gender and race. RESULTS: 42% of applicants were women. When comparing gender, men applicants were more likely to use a grindstone/communal adjective (73.2% vs 57.1%, p = 0.006). Men applicants were less likely to identify with an agentic adjective (21% vs 35%). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to gender stereotypes, women general surgery residency applicants tend to self-identify using ability/agentic adjectives more than men applicants. Bias training is important to mitigate the negative consequences of perceived traditional gender role-violation.
