Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aimed to determine the current state of oncology education in Canadian family medicine postgraduate medical education programs (FM PGME) and examine opinions regarding optimal oncology education in these programs. METHODS:A survey was designed to evaluate ideal and current oncology teaching, educational topics, objectives, and competencies in FM PGMEs. The survey was sent to Canadian family medicine (FM) residents and program directors (PDs). RESULTS:In total, 150 residents and 17 PDs affiliated with 16 of 17 Canadian medical schools completed the survey. The majority indicated their programs do not have a mandatory clinical rotation in oncology (79% residents, 88% PDs). Low rates of residents (7%) and PDs (13%) reported FM residents being adequately prepared for their role in caring for cancer patients (p?=?0.03). Residents and PDs believed the most optimal method of teaching oncology is through clinical exposure (65% residents, 80% PDs). Residents and PDs agreed the most important topics to learn (rated ?4.7 on 5-point Likert scale) were: performing pap smears, cancer screening/prevention, breaking bad news, and approach to patient with increased cancer risk. According to residents, other important topics such as appropriate cancer patient referrals, managing cancer complications and post-treatment surveillance were only taught at frequencies of 52, 40 and 36%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Current FM PGME oncology education is suboptimal, although the degree differs in the opinion of residents and PDs. This study identified topics and methods of education which could be focussed upon to improve FM oncology education.
Project description:ObjectivesTo deliver an estimate of bullying among residents and fellows in the United States graduate medical education system and to explore its prevalence within unique subgroups.Design/setting/participantsA national cross-sectional survey from a sample of residents and fellows who completed an online bullying survey conducted in June 2015. The survey was distributed using a chain sampling method that relied on electronic referrals from 4,055 training programs, with 1,791 residents and fellows completing the survey in its entirety. Survey respondents completed basic demographic and programmatic information plus four general bullying and 20 specific bullying behavior questions. Between-group differences were compared for demographic and programmatic stratifications.Main outcomes/measuresSelf-reported subjected to workplace bullying from peers, attendings, nurses, ancillary staff, or patients in the past 12 months.ResultsAlmost half of the respondents (48%) reported being subjected to bullying although both those subjected and not subjected reported experiencing ? 1 bullying behaviors (95% and 39% respectively). Attendings (29%) and nurses (27%) were the most frequently identified source of bullying, followed by patients, peers, consultants and staff. Attempts to belittle and undermine work and unjustified criticism and monitoring of work were the most frequently reported bullying behaviors (44% each), followed by destructive innuendo and sarcasm (37%) and attempts to humiliate (32%). Specific bullying behaviors were more frequently reported by female, non-white, shorter than < 5'8 and BMI ? 25 individuals.Conclusions/relevanceMany trainees report experiencing bullying in the United States graduate medical education programs. Including specific questions on bullying in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education annual resident/fellow survey, implementation of anti-bullying policies, and a multidisciplinary approach engaging all stakeholders may be of great value to eliminate these pervasive behaviors in the field of healthcare.
Project description:BackgroundThe role of a program coordinator (PC) in graduate medical education (GME) has become increasingly important.ObjectiveWe surveyed PCs nationwide to identify the predictors of better performance outcomes.MethodsA 58-question survey focusing on metrics that could be used to measure administrative performance was submitted electronically to 1515 PCs. Preplanned analysis was conducted to determine the association between receipt of training and PC performance metrics.ResultsA total of 712 (47%) PCs responded to the survey completely. Most (59%, 422 of 712) were from university programs. Respondents reported having received only GME training (17%, 121 of 712), only peer training (15%, 106 of 712), or both (9%, 67 of 712). Of those who reported, 51% (366 of 712) with GME training and 99% (708 of 712) with peer training found that training was helpful. The PCs who received both GME and peer training reported better performance, including lower rates of delayed starts and graduations, higher rates of compliance in cases and work hour reporting, and higher levels of readiness for internal reviews, GME visits, and the Match. The PCs who received only peer training reported better performance than did those with only GME training. Self-reported factors associated with improved PC performance were having prior administrative experience (β = 0.201, P = .010) and being a PC for a longer time (β = 0.188, P = .027).ConclusionsHaving only GME training did not seem sufficient for an optimal PC performance. A combination of peer and GME orientation yielded the best administrative outcomes.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Concern over rising healthcare expenditures has led to increased scrutiny of medical practices. As medical liability and malpractice risk rise to crisis levels, the medical-legal environment has contributed to the practice of defensive medicine as practitioners attempt to mitigate liability risk. High-risk specialties, such as neurosurgery, are particularly affected and neurosurgeons have altered their practices to lessen medical-legal risk. We present the first national survey of American neurosurgeons' perceptions of malpractice liability and defensive medicine practices. METHODS: A validated, 51-question online-survey was sent to 3344 practicing U.S. neurosurgeon members of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, which represents 76% of neurosurgeons in academic and private practices. RESULTS: A total of 1028 surveys were completed (31% response rate) by neurosurgeons representing diverse sub-specialty practices. Respondents engaged in defensive medicine practices by ordering additional imaging studies (72%), laboratory tests (67%), referring patients to consultants (66%), or prescribing medications (40%). Malpractice premiums were considered a "major or extreme" burden by 64% of respondents which resulted in 45% of respondents eliminating high-risk procedures from their practice due to liability concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Concerns and perceptions about medical liability lead practitioners to practice defensive medicine. As a result, diagnostic testing, consultations and imaging studies are ordered to satisfy a perceived legal risk, resulting in higher healthcare expenditures. To minimize malpractice risk, some neurosurgeons have eliminated high-risk procedures. Left unchecked, concerns over medical liability will further defensive medicine practices, limit patient access to care, and increase the cost of healthcare delivery in the United States.
Project description:BackgroundThe relevance of Public Health Genomics (PHG) education among public health specialists has been recently acknowledged by the Association of Schools of Public Health in the European Region. The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to assess the prevalence of post-graduate public health schools for medical doctors which offer PHG training in Italy.MethodsThe directors of the 33 Italian public health schools were interviewed for the presence of a PHG course in place. We stratified by geographical area (North, Centre and South) of the schools. We performed comparisons of categorical data using the chi-squared test.ResultsThe response rate was 73% (24/33 schools). Among respondents, 15 schools (63%) reported to have at least one dedicated course in place, while nine (38%) did not, with a significant geographic difference.ConclusionsResults showed a good implementation of courses in PHG discipline in Italian post-graduate public health schools. However further harmonization of the training programs of schools in public health at EU level is needed.
Project description:PURPOSE:Including people with disabilities in precision medicine research (PMR) is key for increasing cohorts' diversity, improving understanding of population health, and attaining social justice for the United States' largest health disparities group. We conducted a national survey to explore the views of people with disabilities about PMR. METHODS:An online survey was developed in disability-accessible formats. Key questions included views on PMR, willingness to participate and to provide data, perceived barriers to participation and potential remedies, and interest in engagement in the study. Analyses described results for all participants and compared results for key demographic characteristics. RESULTS:In total, 1294 participants completed the survey. Participants expressed strong support for PMR, and willingness to participate in PMR; to provide lifestyle, biological, and medical information; and to engage with the study. However, 76% identified a total of 3 to 8 barriers to participation, and most would not provide environmental samples or information from their social media account(s) and activity trackers. Differences were observed across racial, ethnic, and gender groups and are discussed. CONCLUSIONS:Barriers to disability inclusion need to be removed, and further research conducted to better understand concerns about PMR and to develop studies that resonate with the interests and needs of this population.
Project description:BackgroundIn the present milieu of rapid innovation in undergraduate medical education at US medical schools, the current structure and composition of clinical education in Internal Medicine (IM) is not clear.ObjectiveTo describe the current composition of undergraduate clinical education structure in IM.DesignNational annual Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) cross-sectional survey.ParticipantsOne hundred twenty-nine clerkship directors at all Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited US medical schools with CDIM membership as of September 1, 2017.Main measuresIM core clerkship and post-core clerkship structure descriptions, including duration, educational models, inpatient experiences, ambulatory experiences, and requirements.Key resultsThe survey response rate was 83% (107/129). The majority of schools utilized one core IM clerkship model (67%) and continued to use a traditional block model for a majority of their students (84%). Overall 26% employed a Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship model and 14% employed a shared block model for some students. The mean inpatient duration was 7.0 ± 1.7 weeks (range 3-11 weeks) and 94% of clerkships stipulated that students spend some inpatient time on general medicine. IM-specific ambulatory experiences were not required for students in 65% of IM core clerkship models. Overall 75% of schools did not require an advanced IM clinical experience after the core clerkship; however, 66% of schools reported a high percentage of students (> 40%) electing to take an IM sub-internship. About half of schools (48%) did not require overnight call or night float during the clinical IM sub-internship.ConclusionsAlthough there are diverse core IM clerkship models, the majority of IM core clerkships are still traditional block models. The mean inpatient duration is 7 weeks and 65% of IM core clerkship models did not require IM-specific ambulatory education.
Project description:This nation-wide survey was conducted among Korean adults to examine the public interest in and attitudes toward establishing a citizen participation cohort model and to collect data to support and determine the future policy and research directions of the Resource Collection Project for Precision Medicine Research (RCP-PMR) before the project proceeds. The demographic framework of the survey population was established based on the statistical standards of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety. An online survey was carried out using web panels between 14 May 2018 and 23 May 2018. Sampling was performed using a simple proportional allocation method considering region, gender, and age. From this survey, the RCP-PMR received very high support (94.5%) and the intention to participate was as high as 83.5%. Respondents had a very positive attitude toward providing their samples and information to the study (84.5-89.9%). In terms of incentives to participate, respondents wanted to receive health information (80.2%), monetary compensation (51.4%), and smart devices (41.3%). Most participants responded that it was appropriate to carry out the project at governmental research institutes (66.9%). Respondents also had a positive attitude toward sharing their information and samples as long as it was only shared with the governmental researchers who run the project (88.0%). However, the survey participants expressed concerns about the study being time consuming or a hassle (38.1%), privacy breaches (33.6%), and the lack of returning benefits of participation (25.1%). Participants had a negative attitude toward sharing their data with researchers who are not directly involved in the RCP-PMR. Considering the future use of the database derived from this project, it will be important to communicate with the lay public as well as the RCP-PMR participants to understand their needs in participating in the forthcoming study and to improve their understanding of the goals of the project, and how data sharing can contribute to disease research and prevention. The RCP-PMR should consider building an efficient citizen-participation program and privacy protection for the research participants.
Project description:BackgroundGender inequities are documented in academic medicine. Within General Internal Medicine (GIM), there are fewer female division directors and first and last authors on publications. With gender parity in US medical school graduates and with Academic Hospital (AH) medicine being a relatively newer discipline, one might postulate that AH would have less gender inequity.DesignA national survey of AH programs was developed via literature review and expert recommendations. Domains included program and faculty information. Gender of the leader was determined via website or telephone call.ParticipantsLeaders of AH programs associated with the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). Programs without a primary teaching hospital or hospitalist program and those not staffed by university-affiliated physicians were excluded.Main measuresDescription and characteristics of leaders and programs including a multivariable analysis of gender of hospitalist leaders and the portion of female faculty.Key results59% response rate (80 of 135); there were no differences between responders/non-responders in NIH funding (p = 0.12), type of institution (p = 0.09), geographic region (p = 0.15), or year established (p = 0.86). Reported number of female and male faculty were approximately equal. 80% of hospitalist leaders were male; 37% of male hospitalist leaders were professors, no female leaders were professors. In univariate and multivariate analysis only the number of hospitals staffed was a significant predictor of having a female hospitalist leader. There were no significant predictors of having fewer female faculty.ConclusionThis study demonstrated gender inequality in academic hospital medicine regarding leadership and rank. Though there was equal gender distribution of faculty, among leaders most were men and all "full professors" were men. As diversity benefits the tripartite mission research on methods, initiatives and programs that achieve gender equity in leadership are needed.
Project description:ObjectiveEven as genomic medicine is implemented globally, there remains a lack of rigorous, national assessments of physicians' current genomic practice and continuing genomics education needs. The aim of this study was to address this gap.DesignA cross-sectional survey, informed by qualitative data and behaviour change theory, to assess the current landscape of Australian physicians' genomic medicine practice, perceptions of proximity and individual preparedness, and preferred models of practice and continuing education. The survey was advertised nationally through 10 medical colleges, 24 societies, 62 hospitals, social media, professional networks and snowballing.Results409 medical specialists across Australia responded, representing 30 specialties (majority paediatricians, 20%), from mainly public hospitals (70%) in metropolitan areas (75%). Half (53%) had contacted their local genetics services and half (54%) had ordered or referred for a gene panel or exome/genome sequencing test in the last year. Two-thirds (67%) think genomics will soon impact their practice, with a significant preference for models that involved genetics services (p<0.0001). Currently, respondents mainly perform tasks associated with pretest family history taking and counselling, but more respondents expect to perform tasks at all stages of testing in the future, including tasks related to the test itself, and reporting results. While one-third (34%) recently completed education in genomics, only a quarter (25%) felt prepared to practise. Specialists would like (more) education, particularly on genomic technologies and clinical utility, and prefer this to be through varied educational strategies.ConclusionsThis survey provides data from a breadth of physician specialties that can inform models of genetic service delivery and genomics education. The findings support education providers designing and delivering education that best meet learner needs to build a competent, genomic-literate workforce. Further analyses are underway to characterise early adopters of genomic medicine to inform strategies to increase engagement.