Changing the Surgical Residency: A Mixed-Methods Study of Residents’ and Faculty Experiences One Year After Implementation

Objective: To evaluate a reformed surgical residency curriculum aimed at addressing emerging practice models, enhancing residents’ educational experience, and improving the quality/continuity of patient care by reducing the service size and enhancing attending-resident interactions. Methods: A mixed-methods study of the surgical training program following curriculum reform including: 1) focus group and individual qualitative interviews with residents, attendings, nurses, and advanced practice providers to explore stakeholder perspectives on curriculum reform, 2) time study of surgical resident activities, and 3) quantitative assessment of surgical case logs. Results: Qualitative interviews demonstrated disparate knowledge and attitudes regarding the goals of the curriculum with emergence of several themes during transcript analysis including: Goals of the Change, Learning and Educational Value, Communication, Teamwork, Service, and Quality of Life. Both positive aspects of curriculum reform (e.g., improved focus on resident education and balance between educational and service activities, communication, and opportunity for direct feedback and observation) and negative ones (e.g., lack of role clarity, insufficient workforce) were identified. Despite limitations, the time study revealed variability in resident activities by post-graduate year with more time spent on indirect patient care activities in the early years and more time in the OR and one-on-one with attendings later. Quantitative analysis of surgical case logs, previously published, showed no significant decrease in number of cases for residents by either training level or role. Conclusions: This single-institution mixed methods study suggests that a reformed surgical residency curriculum improved residents’ educational experiences and the balance between educational and service activities without affecting operative volume. Multiple modalities of assessment are essential to identify the various positive and negative aspects of an educational intervention

How physicians manage medical uncertainty: A qualitative study and conceptual taxonomy

Background - Medical uncertainty is a pervasive and important problem, but the strategies physicians use to manage it have not been systematically described. Objectives - To explore the uncertainty management strategies employed by physicians practicing in acute-care hospital settings and to organize these strategies within a conceptual taxonomy that can guide further efforts to understand and improve physicians’ tolerance of medical uncertainty. Design - Qualitative study using individual in-depth interviews. Participants - Convenience sample of 22 physicians and trainees (11 attending physicians, 7 residents [postgraduate years 1–3), 4 fourth-year medical students), working within 3 medical specialties (emergency medicine, internal medicine, internal medicine–pediatrics), at a single large US teaching hospital. Measurements - Semistructured interviews explored participants’ strategies for managing medical uncertainty and temporal changes in their uncertainty tolerance. Inductive qualitative analysis of audio-recorded interview transcripts was conducted to identify and categorize key themes and to develop a coherent conceptual taxonomy of uncertainty management strategies. Results - Participants identified various uncertainty management strategies that differed in their primary focus: 1) ignorance-focused, 2) uncertainty-focused, 3) response-focused, and 4) relationship-focused. Ignorance- and uncertainty-focused strategies were primarily curative (aimed at reducing uncertainty), while response- and relationship-focused strategies were primarily palliative (aimed at ameliorating aversive effects of uncertainty). Several participants described a temporal evolution in their tolerance of uncertainty, which coincided with the development of greater epistemic maturity, humility, flexibility, and openness. Conclusions - Physicians and physician-trainees employ a variety of uncertainty management strategies focused on different goals, and their tolerance of uncertainty evolves with the development of several key capacities. More work is needed to understand and improve the management of medical uncertainty by physicians, and a conceptual taxonomy can provide a useful organizing framework for this work

Epistemic Beliefs: Relationship to Future Expectancies and Quality of Life in Cancer Patients.

CONTEXT: Expectations about the future (future expectancies) are important determinants of psychological well-being among cancer patients, but the strategies patients use to maintain positive and cope with negative expectancies are incompletely understood. OBJECTIVES: To obtain preliminary evidence on the potential role of one strategy for managing future expectancies: the adoption of epistemic beliefs in fundamental limits to medical knowledge. METHODS: A sample of 1307 primarily advanced-stage cancer patients participating in a genomic tumor testing study in community oncology practices completed measures of epistemic beliefs, positive future expectancies, and mental and physical health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Descriptive and linear regression analyses were conducted to assess the relationships between these factors and test two hypotheses: 1) epistemic beliefs affirming fundamental limits to medical knowledge ( fallibilistic epistemic beliefs ) are associated with positive future expectancies and mental HRQOL, and 2) positive future expectancies mediate this association. RESULTS: Participants reported relatively high beliefs in limits to medical knowledge (M = 2.94, s.d.=.67) and positive future expectancies (M = 3.01, s.d.=.62) (range 0-4), and relatively low mental and physical HRQOL. Consistent with hypotheses, fallibilistic epistemic beliefs were associated with positive future expectancies (b = 0.11, SE=.03, P\u3c 0.001) and greater mental HRQOL (b = 0.99, SE=.34, P = 0.004); positive expectancies also mediated the association between epistemic beliefs and mental HRQOL (Sobel Z=4.27, P\u3c0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Epistemic beliefs in limits to medical knowledge are associated with positive future expectancies and greater mental HRQOL; positive expectancies mediate the association between epistemic beliefs and HRQOL. More research is needed to confirm these relationships and elucidate their causal mechanisms

Physician-patient communication about genomic tumor testing: perceptions of oncology providers

Background: • Genomic tumor testing (GTT) is a new technology and a cornerstone of the “precision medicine” movement in cancer care. • GTT uses next-generation genome sequencing technology to identify somatic variants in tumor cells. • By identifying somatic variants that predict responses to cancer therapies, GTT can help tailor therapy to individual patients, making them more effective. • However, due to the fact that GTT also detects many variants of uncertain significance, its clinical value is currently unproven. • When using GTT, physicians counsel patients about both its benefits and its limitations, but the ideal goals and content of these physician-patient discussions have not been clearly defined

Community oncology clinicians’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes regarding genomic tumor testing

Introduction: Genomic tumor testing (GTT) is a new technology that promises to make cancer treatment more precise. However, little is known about clinicians’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes regarding GTT, particularly in community oncology settings

Factors Affecting Physicians\u27 Intentions to Communicate Personalized Prognostic Information to Cancer Patients at the End of Life: An Experimental Vignette Study.

PURPOSE: To explore the effects of personalized prognostic information on physicians\u27 intentions to communicate prognosis to cancer patients at the end of life, and to identify factors that moderate these effects. METHODS: A factorial experiment was conducted in which 93 family medicine physicians were presented with a hypothetical vignette depicting an end-stage gastric cancer patient seeking prognostic information. Physicians\u27 intentions to communicate prognosis were assessed before and after provision of personalized prognostic information, while emotional distress of the patient and ambiguity (imprecision) of the prognostic estimate were varied between subjects. General linear models were used to test the effects of personalized prognostic information, patient distress, and ambiguity on prognostic communication intentions, and potential moderating effects of 1) perceived patient distress, 2) perceived credibility of prognostic models, 3) physician numeracy (objective and subjective), and 4) physician aversion to risk and ambiguity. RESULTS: Provision of personalized prognostic information increased prognostic communication intentions (P \u3c 0.001, η(2) = 0.38), although experimentally manipulated patient distress and prognostic ambiguity had no effects. Greater change in communication intentions was positively associated with higher perceived credibility of prognostic models (P = 0.007, η(2) = 0.10), higher objective numeracy (P = 0.01, η(2) = 0.09), female sex (P = 0.01, η(2) = 0.08), and lower perceived patient distress (P = 0.02, η(2) = 0.07). Intentions to communicate available personalized prognostic information were positively associated with higher perceived credibility of prognostic models (P = 0.02, η(2) = 0.09), higher subjective numeracy (P = 0.02, η(2) = 0.08), and lower ambiguity aversion (P = 0.06, η(2) = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Provision of personalized prognostic information increases physicians\u27 prognostic communication intentions to a hypothetical end-stage cancer patient, and situational and physician characteristics moderate this effect. More research is needed to confirm these findings and elucidate the determinants of prognostic communication at the end of life

Unknown Risks: Parental Hesitation about Vaccination.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study of a select sample of vaccine-hesitant parents (VHPs) explores perceived and constructed personal judgments about the risks and uncertainties associated with vaccines and vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) and how these subjective risk judgments influence parents\u27 decisions about childhood vaccination. METHODS: The study employed semistructured focus group interviews with 42 VHPs to elicit parents\u27 perceptions and thought processes regarding the risks associated with vaccination and nonvaccination, the sources of these perceptions, and their approach to decision making about vaccination for their children. RESULTS: VHPs engage in various reasoning processes and tend to perceive risks of vaccination as greater than the risks of VPDs. At the same time, VHPs engage in other reasoning processes that lead them to perceive ambiguity in information about the harms of vaccination-citing concerns about the missing, conflicting, changing, or otherwise unreliable nature of information. CONCLUSIONS: VHPs\u27 refusal of vaccination may reflect their aversion to both the risk and ambiguity they perceive to be associated with vaccination. Mitigating this vaccine hesitancy likely requires reconstructing the risks and ambiguities associated with vaccination-a challenging task that requires providing parents with meaningful evidence-based information on the known risks of vaccination versus VPDs and explicitly acknowledging the risks that remain truly unknown

Pilot Study of an Encounter Decision Aid for Lung Cancer Screening

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has mandated in-person shared decision-making (SDM) counseling with the use of one or more decision aids (DAs) prior to lung cancer screening. We developed a single-page, paper-based, encounter DA (EDA) to be used within a clinician-patient encounter for lung cancer screening and conducted a pre-post pilot intervention study to evaluate its feasibility and effects on patient decisional conflict. Patients referred to a pulmonary practice-based lung cancer screening program were surveyed before and after an SDM visit with a pulmonologist, who used the EDA to counsel the patient. Patient knowledge of the mortality benefit from screening and the frequency of abnormal screening test results was evaluated after the visit, while decisional conflict was measured before and after the visit using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Twenty-three patients participated (mean age = 65.8 years; 43% female; mean smoking history = 57.8 pack-years; 48% currently smoking). Following the visit, 28% of participants correctly understood the mortality benefit of lung cancer screening, while 82% understood the frequency of abnormal screening tests. The mean total DCS score decreased from 35.0 to 0.2 after the visit (p \u3c 0.001). These data suggest that a single-page, paper-based EDA is feasible and potentially effective in reducing decision conflict when used within a SDM visit, although more research is needed to establish the independent effects of the EDA, and future efforts to promote SDM may need to devote greater attention to improving patient understanding of the mortality benefit of screening