Lessons Learned From State-Based Efforts to Leverage Medicaid Funds for Graduate Medical Education.

PURPOSE: Total Medicaid funds invested in graduate medical education (GME) increased from $3.78 billion in 2009 to $7.39 billion in 2022. States have flexibility in designing Medicaid GME payments to address population health needs. This study assessed states' impetus for using Medicaid funds for GME, structure of state Medicaid payments, composition and charge of advisory bodies that guide these investments, and degree of transparency and accountability to track whether Medicaid GME investments achieved desired workforce outcomes. METHOD: Structured interviews were conducted in 2015 to 2016 and 2020 to 2021 with subject matter experts representing 10 states. Interview transcripts were analyzed and coded in 6 thematic areas: impetus for using Medicaid funds, the structure of state Medicaid payments, the composition of advisory bodies, the degree of transparency of Medicaid investments, accountability of Medicaid investments, and challenges and changes. RESULTS: States used Medicaid GME funding to address maldistribution of physicians by geography, setting, and specialty, respond to population growth and undergraduate medical education expansion, offset potential loss of teaching health center program funds, and launch new programs and sustain existing ones. States leveraged Medicaid funding by modifying state plan amendments and redesigning funding formulas to meet specific health workforce needs. Many states had advisory bodies to educate legislators, reach consensus on workforce needs, recommend how to disburse funds, and navigate competing stakeholder interests. States identified a need for improved data and analytic systems to understand workforce needs and monitor the outcomes of GME investments. Determining which accountability measures to use and implementing metrics were challenges. CONCLUSIONS: States have much to learn from each other about strategies to best leverage Medicaid funds to develop and sustain residency programs to meet population health needs. Learning collaboratives should be developed to provide a forum for states to share best practices and strategies for overcoming challenges.

Forecasting the Future Supply of Pediatric Subspecialists in the United States: 2020-2040.

Concerns persist about whether the United States has an adequate supply of pediatric subspecialists and whether they are appropriately distributed across the nation to meet children's health needs. This article describes the data and methods used to develop a workforce projection model that estimates the future supply of 14 pediatric subspecialities certified by the American Board of Pediatrics at the national and US census region and division levels from 2020 to 2040. The 14 subspecialties include adolescent medicine, pediatric cardiology, child abuse pediatrics, pediatric critical care medicine, developmental-behavioral pediatrics, pediatric emergency medicine, pediatric endocrinology, pediatric gastroenterology, pediatric hematology-oncology, pediatric infectious diseases, neonatal-perinatal medicine, pediatric nephrology, pediatric pulmonology, and pediatric rheumatology. Hospital medicine was excluded because of the lack of historical data needed for the model. This study addresses the limitations of prior models that grouped adult and pediatric physician subspecialty workforces together and aggregated pediatric subspecialties. The model projects supply at national and subnational levels while accounting for geographic moves that pediatric subspecialists make after training and during their career. Ten "what if" scenarios included in the model simulate the effect of changes in the number of fellows entering training, the rate at which subspecialists leave the workforce, and changes in hours worked in direct and indirect clinical care. All model projections and scenarios are available on a public, interactive Web site. The model's projections can also be examined with other data to provide insight into the possible future of the pediatric subspecialty workforce and offer data to inform decision-making.

Where are the critical care nurses? A statewide analysis of actively practicing nurses' transitions out of the clinical area.

BACKGROUND: Critical care nurse shortages and burnout have spurred interest in the adequacy of nursing supply in the United States. Nurses can move between clinical areas without  additional education or licensure. PURPOSE: To identify transitions that critical care nurses make into non-critical care areas, and examine the prevalence and characteristics associated with those transitions. METHODS: Secondary analysis of state licensure data from 2001-2013. DISCUSSION: More than 75% of nurses (n = 8,408) left critical care in the state, with 44% making clinical area transitions within 5 years. Critical care nurses transitioned into emergency, peri-operative, and cardiology areas. Those observed in recession years were less likely to make transitions; female and nurses with masters/doctorate degrees were more likely. CONCLUSION: This study used state workforce data to examine transitions out of critical care nursing. Findings can inform policies to retain and recruit nurses back into critical care, especially during public health crises.

Bolstering the rural physician workforce in underserved communities: Are Rural Residency Planning and Development Programs finding the sweet spot?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to describe the characteristics of Rural Residency Planning and Development (RRPD) Programs, compare the characteristics of counties with and without RRPD programs, and identify rural places where future RRPD programs could be developed. METHODS: The study sample comprised 67 rural sites training residents in 40 counties in 24 US states. Descriptive statistics were used to describe RRPD programs and logistic regression to predict the probability of a county being an RRPD site as a function of population, primary care physicians (PCP) per 10,000 population, and the social vulnerability index (SVI) compared to a control sample of nonmetro counties without RRPD sites. FINDINGS: Most RRPD grantees (78%) were family medicine programs affiliated with medical schools (97%). RRPD counties were more populous (P<.01), had a higher population density (P<.05), and a higher percent of the non-White or Hispanic population (P = .05) compared to non-RRPD counties. Both higher population (P<.001) and PCP ratio (P = .046) were strong predictors, while SVI (P = .07) was a weak predictor of being an RRPD county. CONCLUSIONS: RRPD sites appear to represent a "sweet spot" of rural counties that have the population and physician supply to support a training program but also are relatively more socially vulnerable with high-need populations. Additional counties fitting this "sweet spot" could be targeted for funding to address health disparities and health workforce maldistribution.

New Opportunities for Expanding Rural Graduate Medical Education to Improve Rural Health Outcomes: Implications of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021.

Evidence shows that those living in rural communities experience consistently worse health outcomes than their urban and suburban counterparts. One proven strategy to address this disparity is to increase the physician supply in rural areas through graduate medical education (GME) training. However, rural hospitals have faced challenges developing training programs in these underserved areas, largely due to inadequate federal funding for rural GME. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (CAA) contains multiple provisions that seek to address disparities in Medicare funding for rural GME, including funding for an increase in rural GME positions or "slots" (Section 126), expansion of rural training opportunities (Section 127), and relief for hospitals that have very low resident payments and/or caps (Section 131). In this Invited Commentary, the authors describe historical factors that have impeded the growth of training programs in rural areas, summarize the implications of each CAA provision for rural GME, and provide guidance for institutions seeking to avail themselves of the opportunities presented by the CAA. These policy changes create new opportunities for rural hospitals and partnering urban medical centers to bolster rural GME training, and consequently the physician workforce in underserved communities.

Improving the Health of Rural Communities Through Academic-Community Partnerships and Interprofessional Health Care and Training Models.

Health disparities between rural and urban areas are widening at a time when urban health care systems are increasingly buying rural hospitals to gain market share. New payment models, shifting from fee-for-service to value-based care, are gaining traction, creating incentives for health care systems to manage the social risk factors that increase health care utilization and costs. Health system consolidation and value-based care are increasingly linking the success of urban health care systems to rural communities. Yet, despite the natural ecosystem rural communities provide for interprofessional learning and collaborative practice, many academic health centers (AHCs) have not invested in building team-based models of practice in rural areas. With responsibility for training the future health workforce and major investments in research infrastructure and educational capacity, AHCs are uniquely positioned to develop interprofessional practice and training opportunities in rural areas and evaluate the cost savings and quality outcomes associated with team-based care models. To accomplish this work, AHCs will need to develop academic-community partnerships that include networks of providers and practices, non-AHC educational organizations, and community-based agencies. In this commentary, the authors highlight 3 examples of academic-community partnerships that developed and implemented interprofessional practice and education models and were designed around specific patient populations with measurable outcomes: North Carolina's Asheville Project, the Boise Interprofessional Academic Patient Aligned Care model, and the Interprofessional Care Access Network framework. These innovative models demonstrate the importance of academic-community partnerships to build teams that address social needs, improve health outcomes, and lower costs. They also highlight the need for more rigorous reporting on the components of the academic-community partnerships involved, the different types of health workers deployed, and the design of the interprofessional training and practice models implemented.

Primary Care Clinicians in Low-Access Counties.

Advanced practice providers comprise an increasing percentage of the health care and primary care workforce. This paper evaluates the weighted contribution of advanced practice providers to the primary care workforce in well-served and underserved counties across North Carolina using age- and sex-adjusted population measures of access.

Efforts to Recruit Medical Students From Rural Counties: A Model to Evaluate Recruitment Efforts.

Background Over the past 40 years, the physician supply of North Carolina (NC) grew faster than the total population. However, the distribution of physicians between urban and rural areas increased, with many more physicians in urban areas. In rural counties, access to care and health disparities remain concerning. As a result, the medical school implemented pipeline programs to recruit more rural students. This study investigates the results of these recruitment efforts. Methodology Descriptive analyses were conducted to compare the number and percentage of rural and urban students from NC who applied, interviewed, and were accepted to the University of North Carolina's School of Medicine (UNC SOM). The likely pool of rural applicants was based on the number of college-educated 18-34-year-olds by county. Results Roughly 10.9% of NC's population of college-educated 18-34-year-olds live in rural counties. Between 2017 and 2019, 9.3% (n = 225) of UNC SOM applicants were from a rural county. An increase of just 14 additional rural applicants annually would bring the proportion of rural UNC SOM applicants in alignment with the potential applicant pool in rural NC counties. Conclusions Our model of analysis successfully calculated the impact of recruitment efforts to achieve proportional parity in the medical school class with the rural population of the state. Addressing rural physician workforce needs will require multiple strategies that affect different parts of the medical education and healthcare systems, including boosting college completion rates in rural areas. This model of analysis can also be applied to other pipeline programs to document the success of the recruitment efforts.

Harnessing the electronic health record to advance integrated care.

INTRODUCTION: Integrated health care is utilized in primary care clinics to meet patients' physical, behavioral, and social needs. Current methods to collect and evaluate the effectiveness of integrated care require refinement. Using informatics and electronic health records (EHR) to distill large amounts of clinical data may help researchers measure the impact of integrated care more efficiently. This exploratory pilot study aimed to (a) determine the feasibility of using EHR documentation to identify behavioral health and social care components of integrated care, using social work as a use case, and (b) develop a lexicon to inform future research using natural language processing. METHOD: Study steps included development of a preliminary lexicon of behavioral health and social care interventions to address basic needs, creation of an abstraction guide, identification of appropriate EHR notes, manual chart abstraction, revision of the lexicon, and synthesis of findings. RESULTS: Notes (N = 647) were analyzed from a random sample of 60 patients. Notes documented behavioral health and social care components of care but were difficult to identify due to inconsistencies in note location and titling. Although the interventions were not described in detail, the outcomes of screening, referral, and brief treatment were included. The integrated care team frequently used EHR to share information and communicate. DISCUSSION: Opportunities and challenges to using EHR data were identified and need to be addressed to better understand the behavioral health and social care interventions in integrated care. To best leverage EHR data, future research must determine how to document and extract pertinent information about integrated team-based interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The evolving sex, race, and ethnic composition of the surgical workforce: North Carolina is a bellwether of national change.

BACKGROUND: North Carolina, as a state with a significant Black population and fast-growing Hispanic population, serves as bellwether of demographic changes nationally and the challenges facing the nation to recruit and retain a general surgery workforce that mirrors the population. METHODS: Annual licensure data from the North Carolina Medical Board were analyzed between 2004 and 2019. Physicians self-reporting a specialty of abdominal surgery, critical care surgery, colon and rectal surgery, general surgery, trauma surgery, proctology, and surgical oncology were categorized as general surgeons. RESULTS: Female surgeons made the most gains from 2004, at just 8% of the workforce in 2004 to 26% of the workforce in 2019. Over the same period, Black surgeons increased from just 5% to 6% of the workforce, with those gains largely represented by Black female surgeons. Almost half of North Carolina's Black physicians are aged 46 and 55 and will be nearing retirement in the coming decade. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Hispanic general surgeons were 45 or younger, and one-third of these young surgeons were international medical graduates. CONCLUSION: Although the general surgery workforce in North Carolina is slowly diversifying, growth in the Black surgeon workforce has stagnated in the last 15 years at levels much lower than their representation in the population. More research is needed on the individual and life course phenomena that drive this underrepresentation.

The Supply and Distribution of the Preventive Medicine Physician Workforce.

CONTEXT: Preventive medicine physicians work at the intersection of clinical medicine and public health. A previous report on the state of the preventive medicine workforce in 2000 revealed an ongoing decline in preventive medicine physicians and residents, but there have been few updates since. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe trends in both the number of board-certified preventive medicine physicians and those physicians who self-designate preventive medicine as a primary or secondary specialty and examine the age, gender distribution, and geographic distribution of this workforce. DESIGN: Analysis of the supply of preventive medicine physicians using data derived from board certification files of the American Board of Preventive Medicine and self-designation data from the American Medical Association Masterfile. SETTING: The 50 US states and District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Board-certified and self-designated preventive medicine physicians in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number, demographics, and location of preventive medicine physicians in United States. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2018, the total number of physicians board certified in preventive medicine increased from 6091 to 9270; the number of self-identified preventive medicine physicians has generally decreased since 2000, with a leveling off in the past 4 years matching the trend of preventive medicine physicians per 100 000 population; there is a recent increase in women in the specialty; the practice locations of preventive medicine physicians do not match the US population in rural or micropolitan areas; and the average age of preventive medicine physicians is increasing. CONCLUSIONS: The number of preventive medicine physicians is not likely to match population needs in the United States in the near term and beyond. Assessing the preventive medicine physician workforce in the United States is complicated by difficulties in defining the specialty and because less than half of self-designated preventive medicine physicians hold a board certification in the specialty.

Using State Licensure Data to Assess North Carolina's Health Workforce COVID-19 Response Capacity.

BACKGROUND In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care decision-makers in North Carolina needed information about the available health workforce in order to conduct workforce surge planning and to anticipate concerns about professional or geographic workforce shortages.METHOD Descriptive and cartographic analyses were conducted using licensure data held by the North Carolina Health Professions Data System to assess the supply of respiratory therapists, nurses, and critical care physicians in North Carolina. Licensure data were merged with population data and numbers of intensive care unit (ICU) beds drawn from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Healthcare Cost Report Information System (HCRIS).RESULTS The pandemic highlighted how critical data infrastructure is to public health infrastructure. Respiratory therapists and acute care, emergency, and critical care nurses were diffused broadly throughout the state, with higher concentrations in urban areas. Critical care physicians were primarily based in areas with academic health centers.LIMITATIONS Data were unavailable to capture the rapid changes in supply due to clinicians reentering or exiting the workforce. County-level analyses did not reflect individual, facility-level supply, which was needed to plan organizational responses.CONCLUSIONS Health care decision-makers in North Carolina were able to access information about the supply of clinicians critical to caring for COVID-19 patients due to the state's long-standing investments in health workforce data infrastructure. Ability to respond was made easier due to strong working relationships between the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, the North Carolina Area Health Education Centers Program, the health professional licensure boards, and state government health care agencies.

The Evolving Role of Medical Assistants in Primary Care Practice: Divergent and Concordant Perspectives from MAs and Family Physicians.

Medical assistants (MAs) are a flexible and low-cost resource for primary care practices and their roles are swiftly transforming. We surveyed MAs and family physicians in primary care practices in North Carolina to assess concordance in their perspectives about MA roles, training, and confidence in performing activities related to visit planning; direct patient care; documentation; patient education, coaching or counseling; quality improvement; population health and communication. For most activities, we did not find evidence of role confusion between MAs and physicians, physician resistance to delegate tasks to properly trained MAs, or MA reluctance to pursue training to take on new roles. Three areas emerged where the gap between the potential and actual implementation of MA role transformation could be narrowed-population health and panel management; patient education, coaching, and counseling; and scribing. Closing these gaps will become increasingly important as our health care system moves toward value-based models of care.

COVID-19 and the Health Workforce.

The health workforce has been greatly affected by COVID-19. In this commentary, we describe the articles included in this health workforce research supplement and how the issues raised by the authors relate to the COVID-19 pandemic and rapidly changing health care environment.