Political Advocacy from Plastic Surgery Trainees in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Methods
A 24-question survey was designed and distributed to all program directors and Resident Council members within the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This initiative was driven by the board and directors and supported by the Resident Council. The Resident Council is a trainee-driven committee within the American Society of Plastic Surgeons that communicates with the Board of Directors.Results
This survey generated a 10.3% response rate with 118 responses out of 1143 trainees in ACGME accredited institutions. When asked in an open-ended fashion to list the most important reason why one planned to vote in the 2020 election, only 6.8% listed healthcare as a factor. Eighty-four percent of respondents believe that their vote impacts future legislation and regulation. Ninety-four percent strongly agree or agree that political legislation affects reimbursement.Conclusions
With only 10.3% of trainees responding, there is a concern that political activity is not a priority for plastic surgery trainees. Plastic surgery trainees are attending summits, meeting with politicians, writing letters, and attending fundraisers. Respondents are overwhelmingly voting and planning to vote in elections, though few list healthcare as a reason. A future goal must be to motivate trainees to consider the intersection between healthcare and plastic surgery.
SUBMITTER: Kozusko SD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8140763 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Social media can be a powerful tool for plastic surgery training programs. Previous studies have shown the value social media may have in integrated residency program recruitment and program reputation. These findings may generalize to fellowship programs, but this space has not been comprehensively studied to date. Therefore, this study aims to characterize plastic surgery fellowship programs' social media usage and identify subsequent opportunities for program leadership to generate engagement.MethodsUnited States plastic surgery fellowship programs in four major subspecialties (hand, microsurgery, craniomaxillofacial, and aesthetic) were identified and evaluated for social media presence on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter. Platform-specific parameters were collected and statistically analyzed in aggregate.ResultsThere were a total of 25 Instagram accounts, four Facebook accounts, and three Twitter accounts across all investigated subspecialties. Hand surgery had the greatest social media presence on Instagram (19.5%) and Twitter (3.4%). Microsurgery had the greatest presence on Facebook (4.7%). Between 2015 and 2022, Instagram was the platform with the greatest increase in adoption by fellowship programs. Geographically, microsurgery and craniomaxillofacial accounts were primarily owned by Midwest programs (66.7%, 100%), and aesthetic primarily by programs in the South (83.3%). Number of Instagram posts and followers were not significantly correlated with hospital reputation (P = 0.12, P = 0.63).ConclusionsSocial media is underutilized by plastic surgery fellowship programs. While Instagram metrics such as posts and followers are not correlated with hospital reputation, the skewed distributions of fellowship accounts, both geographically and across platforms, represent areas of potential growth.
| S-EPMC10358790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic on health care workers has been substantial. However, the impact on vascular surgery (VS) trainees has not yet been determined. The goals of our study were to gauge the impact of COVID-19 on VS trainees' personal and professional life and to assess stressors, coping, and support structures involved in these trainees' response to the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis was an anonymous online survey administered in April 12-24, 2020 during the surge phase of the global COVID-19 pandemic. It is a subset analysis of the cross-sectional Society for Vascular Surgery Wellness Committee Pandemic Practice, Anxiety, Coping, and Support Survey. The cohort surveyed was VS trainees, integrated residents and fellows, in the United States of America. Assessment of the personal impact of the pandemic on VS trainees and the coping strategies used by them was based on the validated Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale and the validated 28-time Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced inventory.ResultsA total of 145 VS trainees responded to the survey, with a 23% response rate (145/638). Significant changes were made to the clinical responsibilities of VS trainees, with 111 (91%) reporting cancellation of elective procedures, 101 (82%) with call schedule changes, 34 (24%) with duties other than related to VS, and 29 (24%) participation in outpatient care delivery. Over one-third (52/144) reported they had performed a procedure on a patient with confirmed COVID-19; 37 (25.7%) reported they were unaware of the COVID-19 status at the time. The majority continued to work after exposure (29/34, 78%). Major stressors included concerns about professional development, infection risk to family/friends, and impact of care delay on patients. The median score for GAD-7 was 4 (interquartile range 1-8), which corresponds to no or low self-reported anxiety levels. VS trainees employed mostly active coping and rarely avoidant coping mechanisms, and the majority were aware and used social media and online support systems. No significant difference was observed between integrated residents and fellows, or by gender.ConclusionsThe pandemic has had significant impact on VS trainees. Trainees reported significant changes to clinical responsibilities, exposure to COVID-19, and pandemic-related stressors but demonstrated healthy coping mechanisms with low self-reported anxiety levels. The VS community should maintain awareness of the impact of the pandemic on the professional and personal development of surgeons in training. We recommend adaptive evolution in training to accommodate the changing learning environment for trainees.
| S-EPMC7608023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:'Science' is a proportionately small but recurring constituent in the rhetorical lexicon of political leaders. To evaluate the use of science-related content relative to other themes in political communications, we undertake a statistical analysis of keywords in U.S. Presidential State of the Union (SOTU) addresses and Presidential Budget Messages (PBM) from Truman (1947) to Trump (2020). Hierarchical clustering and correlation analyses reveal proximate affinities between 'science' and 'research', 'space', 'technology', 'education', and 'climate'. The keywords that are least correlated with 'science' relate to fiscal ('inflation', 'tax') and conflict-related themes ('security', 'war', 'terror'). The most ubiquitous and frequently used keywords are 'economy' and 'tax'. Science-related keywords are used in a positive (promotional) rhetorical context and thus their proportionality in SOTU and PBM corpora is used to define fields of science advocacy (public perception advocacy, funding advocacy, advocacy) for each president. Monte Carlo simulations and randomized sampling of three elements: language (relative frequency of usage of science-related keywords), funding (proposed funding and allocated discretionary funding of science agencies), and actions (e.g. expediency of science advisor appointments, (dis-) establishment of science agencies) are used to generate a science advocacy score (SAS) for each president. The SAS is compared with independent survey-based measures of political popularity. A myriad of political, contextual, and other factors may contribute to lexical choices, policy, and funding actions. Within this complex environment 'science' may have political currency under certain circumstances, particularly where public and political perceptions of the value of science to contribute to matters of priority align.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10669-022-09875-x.
| S-EPMC9389511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19) has challenged the US's healthcare systems to adapt and innovate on multiple fronts. As the course of the COVID-19 pandemic changes, we explore the US public sentiments on resuming previously postponed elective plastic surgery procedures.MethodsA prospective national survey of one thousand US adults was conducted to study public perception of elective plastic surgery procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Binomial logarithmic multivariable regression modeling was employed to study the response data.ResultsNine hundred seventy-three participants were included in study. The majority (86.6%) believed elective plastic surgery should continue during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most (79.6%) would not delay obtaining plastic surgery more than 6 months. Participants expressed concerns of contracting COVID-19 at elective surgery centers (67.5%) or at hospitals (68.5%). Participants who reside in the Midwest (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, P < 0.05) and participants between the ages of 41 and 60 years old (OR 2.8, P < 0.03) were more likely to resume elective plastic surgery. Participants who had undergone a COVID-19 test (OR 0.13, P < 0.04), contracted the COVID-19 infection (OR 0.26, P < 0.03), or were older than 60 years (OR 0.41, P < 0.02) were less likely to resume elective plastic surgery.ConclusionThe majority of the US adult participants (1) agree with resuming elective plastic surgery services, (2) but harbor some concerns of contracting COVID-19 during their procedures, and (3) agree with the majority of safety protocols taken to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8081467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Education in health policy and advocacy is recognized as an important component of health professional training. To date, curricula have only been assessed at the medical school level. OBJECTIVE: We sought to address the gap in these curricula for residents and other health professionals in primary care. INNOVATION: We created a health policy and advocacy curriculum for the VA Connecticut Healthcare System, Center of Excellence in Primary Care Education, an interprofessional, ambulatory-based, training program that includes internal medicine residents, nurse practitioner fellows, health psychology fellows, and pharmacy residents. The policy module focuses on health care finance and delivery, and the advocacy module emphasizes negotiation skills and opinion-based writing. Trainee attitudes were surveyed before and after the course, and using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, relative change was determined. Knowledge acquisition was evaluated with precourse and postcourse examinations using a paired sample t test. RESULTS: From July 2011 through June 2013, 16 trainees completed the course. In the postcourse survey, trainees demonstrated improved comfort with understanding health law and the American health care system (Likert mean increased from 2.1 to 3.0, P = .01), as well as with associated advocacy skills (Likert mean increased from 2.0 to 2.9, P = .04). Knowledge-based test scores also showed significant improvement (increasing from 55% to 78% correct, P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our curriculum integrating core health policy knowledge with advocacy skills represents a novel approach in postgraduate health professional education and resulted in sustained improvement in knowledge and comfort with health policy and advocacy.
| S-EPMC4535222 | biostudies-other
Project description:Despite calls for political consensus, there is growing evidence that the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been politicized in the US. We examined the extent to which this polarization exists among the US public across two national studies. In a representative US sample (N = 699, March 2020) we find that liberals (compared to conservatives) perceive higher risk, place less trust in politicians to handle the pandemic, are more trusting of medical experts such as the WHO, and are more critical of the government response. We replicate these results in a second, pre-registered study (N = 1000; April 2020), and find that results are similar when considering partisanship, rather than political ideology. In both studies we also find evidence that political polarization extends beyond attitudes, with liberals consistently reporting engaging in a significantly greater number of health protective behaviors (e.g., wearing face masks) than conservatives. We discuss the possible drivers of polarization on COVID-19 attitudes and behaviors, and reiterate the need for fostering bipartisan consensus to effectively address and manage the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8631569 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe difference in prevalence of fatigue among postgraduate trainees between the United States and Japan is unknown.MethodsA cross-sectional survey using Iowa Fatigue Scale was administered on postgraduate trainees in two internal medicine residency programs in New York and five postgraduate residency programs in Japan.ResultsOf the 393 trainees, 135 (34%) completed the survey. Seventy-seven (57%) were US trainees. Both fatigue (42% vs 81%) and severe fatigue (4% vs 19%) were more prevalent in Japan (P < .01). US trainees felt more productive during work hours but less fatigued.ConclusionsFatigue was more prevalent among postgraduate trainees in Japan.
| S-EPMC6875530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study explored social factors that are associated with the US deaths caused by COVID-19 after the declaration of economic reopening on May 1, 2020 by President Donald Trump. We seek to understand how county-level support for Trump interacted with social distancing policies to impact COVID-19 death rates. Overall, controlling for several potential confounders, counties with higher levels of Trump support do not necessarily experience greater mortality rates due to COVID-19. The predicted weekly death counts per county tended to increase over time with the implementation of several key health policies. However, the difference in COVID-19 outcomes between counties with low and high levels of Trump support grew after several weeks of the policy implementation as counties with higher levels of Trump support suffered relatively higher death rates. Counties with higher levels of Trump support exhibited lower percentages of mobile staying at home and higher percentages of people working part time or full time than otherwise comparable counties with lower levels of Trump support. The relative negative performance of Trump-supporting counties is robust after controlling for these measures of policy compliance. Counties with high percentages of older (aged 65 and above) persons tended to have greater death rates, as did more populous counties in general. This study indicates that policymakers should consider the risks inherent in controlling public health crises due to divisions in political ideology and confirms that vulnerable communities are at particularly high risk in public health crises.
| S-EPMC8242603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the outbreak in China in late 2019, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has spread around the world and has come to dominate online conversations. By linking 2.3 million Twitter users to locations within the United States, we study in aggregate how political characteristics of the locations affect the evolution of online discussions about COVID-19. We show that COVID-19 chatter in the United States is largely shaped by political polarization. Partisanship correlates with sentiment toward government measures and the tendency to share health and prevention messaging. Cross-ideological interactions are modulated by user segregation and polarized network structure. We also observe a correlation between user engagement with topics related to public health and the varying impact of the disease outbreak in different U.S. states. These findings may help inform policies both online and offline. Decision-makers may calibrate their use of online platforms to measure the effectiveness of public health campaigns, and to monitor the reception of national and state-level policies, by tracking in real-time discussions in a highly polarized social media ecosystem.
| S-EPMC7323338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although gender inequality has been recognized as a crucial factor influencing population health in the developing world, research has not yet thoroughly documented the role it may play in shaping U.S. infant mortality rates (IMRs). This study uses administrative data with fixed-effects and random-effects models to (1) investigate the relationship between political gender inequality in state legislatures and state infant mortality rates in the United States from 1990 to 2012, and (2) project the population level costs associated with women's underrepresentation in 2012. Results indicate that higher percentages of women in state legislatures are associated with reduced IMRs, both between states and within-states over time. According to model predictions, if women were at parity with men in state legislatures, the expected number of infant deaths in the U.S. in 2012 would have been lower by approximately 14.6% (3,478 infant deaths). These findings underscore the importance of women's political representation for population health.
| S-EPMC5635835 | biostudies-literature