The triple helix of clinical, research, and education missions in academic health centers: A qualitative study of diverse stakeholder perspectives.

Introduction: Academic health centers are poised to improve health through their clinical, education, and research missions. However, these missions often operate in silos. The authors explored stakeholder perspectives at diverse institutions to understand challenges and identify alignment strategies. Methods: Authors used an exploratory qualitative design and thematic analysis approach with data obtained from electronic surveys sent to participants at five U.S. academic health centers (2017-18), with four different types of medical school/health system partnerships. Participants included educators, researchers, system leaders, administrators, clinical providers, resident/fellow physicians, and students. Investigators coded data using constant comparative analysis, met regularly to reconcile uncertainties, and collapsed/combined categories. Results: Of 175 participants invited, 113 completed the survey (65%). Three results categories were identified. First, five higher-order themes emerged related to aligning missions, including (a) shared vision and strategies, (b) alignment of strategy with community needs, (c) tension of economic drivers, (d) coproduction of knowledge, and (e) unifying set of concepts spanning all missions. Second, strategies for each mission were identified, including education (new competencies, instructional methods, recruitment), research (shifting agenda, developing partnerships, operations), and clinical operations (delivery models, focus on patient factors/needs, value-based care, well-being). Lastly, strategies for integrating each dyadic mission pair, including research-education, clinical operations education, and research-clinical operations, were identified. Conclusions: Academic health centers are at a crossroads in regard to identity and alignment across the tripartite missions. The study\u27s results provide pragmatic strategies to advance the tripartite missions and lead necessary change for improved patient health

Attitudes toward cost-conscious care among U.S. physicians and medical students: analysis of national cross-sectional survey data by age and stage of training

Abstract Background The success of initiatives intended to increase the value of health care depends, in part, on the degree to which cost-conscious care is endorsed by current and future physicians. This study aimed to first analyze attitudes of U.S. physicians by age and then compare the attitudes of physicians and medical students. Methods A paper survey was mailed in mid-2012 to 3897 practicing physicians randomly selected from the American Medical Association Masterfile. An electronic survey was sent in early 2015 to all 5,992 students at 10 U.S. medical schools. Survey items measured attitudes toward cost-conscious care and perceived responsibility for reducing healthcare costs. Physician responses were first compared across age groups (30–40 years, 41–50 years, 51–60 years, and > 60 years) and then compared to student responses using Chi square tests and logistic regression analyses (controlling for sex). Results A total of 2,556 physicians (65%) and 3395 students (57%) responded. Physician attitudes generally did not differ by age, but differed significantly from those of students. Specifically, students were more likely than physicians to agree that cost to society should be important in treatment decisions (p < 0.001) and that physicians should sometimes deny beneficial but costly services (p < 0.001). Students were less likely to agree that it is unfair to ask physicians to be cost-conscious while prioritizing patient welfare (p < 0.001). Compared to physicians, students assigned more responsibility for reducing healthcare costs to hospitals and health systems (p < 0.001) and less responsibility to lawyers (p < 0.001) and patients (p < 0.001). Nearly all significant differences persisted after controlling for sex and when only the youngest physicians were compared to students. Conclusions Physician attitudes toward cost-conscious care are similar across age groups. However, physician attitudes differ significantly from medical students, even among the youngest physicians most proximate to students in age. Medical student responses suggest they are more accepting of cost-conscious care than physicians and attribute more responsibility for reducing costs to organizations and systems rather than individuals. This may be due to the combined effects of generational differences, new medical school curricula, students’ relative inexperience providing cost-conscious care within complex healthcare systems, and the rapidly evolving U.S. healthcare system.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146517/1/12909_2018_Article_1388.pd

Educating patient-centered, systems-aware physicians: a qualitative analysis of medical student perceptions of value-added clinical systems learning roles

Abstract Background Medical schools have a critical need to develop roles for students that are “value-added,” defined as “…experiential roles that can positively impact health outcomes while also enhancing student knowledge, attitudes, and skills in Clinical or Health Systems Science.” Following implementation of value-added clinical systems learning roles for all first-year students, authors investigated student perceptions of the educational value from these patient-centered experiences. Methods Between 2014 and 16, authors collected logs from students following their working with patients; authors also performed six, 1:1 student interviews, which were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Authors used thematic analysis to explore students’ perceptions of the experience and educational benefits from these roles. Authors identified themes, and agreed upon results and quotations. Results A total of 792 logs from 363 patients and six interviews were completed and analyzed. Students reported six educational benefits of performing value-added clinical systems learning roles in the health system, including enhanced understanding of and appreciation for a patient’s perspective on health care and his/her health, barriers and social determinants of health, health care systems and delivery, interprofessional collaboration and teamwork, clinical medicine, and approach to communicating with patients. Conclusions Students’ reported educational benefits from value-added clinical systems learning roles span several learning areas that align with clinical and Health Systems Science, i.e. the needs of future physicians. These roles have the potential to shift learning from the physician-centric identity to one more fully aligned with patient-centered, team-based providers, while also potentially improving health today

Non-physician and physician preceptors in Landscapes of Practice: a mixed-methods study exploring learning for 1st-year medical students in clinical experiences

ABSTRACTMedical education has traditionally relied on physician educators. With expanding Health Systems Science competencies, non-physician healthcare providers are required. To investigate preceptor-role types, communication frequency, and importance of preceptors in value-added patient navigator roles (PN) and clinical preceptorships (CP). Using a mixed-methods approach, medical students participating in PN and CP during the first year of medical school (n=191) identified individuals with whom they communicated and communication frequency (1=never, 7=frequently), and importance of preceptors to work/education (1=not important, 7=extremely important; open-ended responses). Quantitative data were analyzed via repeated measures using a mixed-effects model and McNemar’s test; effect size was calculated via Cohen’s d or Cohen’s h; qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis. Comparing ratings for non-physicians to physician healthcare professionals in PN, communication frequency (5.54 vs 3.65; p<0.001, d=1.18), importance to work (5.77 vs 4.28, p<0.001, d=0.89) and education (5.02 vs 4.12, p<0.001; d=0.49) were higher for non-physician educators. Comparing ratings for non-physicians to physician healthcare professionals in CP, communication frequency (4.93 vs. 6.48, p<0.001, d=1.33), importance to work (5.12 vs 6.61 vs, p<0.001, d=1.29) and education (4.32 vs 6.55, p<0.001, d=1.89) were higher for physician educators. Qualitative analysis indicated that non-physician healthcare providers in PN focused on Health Systems Science concepts, including social determinants of health and healthcare delivery. In PN, students observed collaboration from the perspective of multiple providers. In CP, healthcare providers, mainly physicians, focused on physician-centric clinical skills and interprofessional collaboration from the physician’s perspective. Educational benefits of non-physician healthcare professionals related to Health Systems Science in work-based clinical settings – or Landscapes of Practice – can help students understand systems-based concepts such as social determinants of health, healthcare delivery systems, and interprofessional collaboration. Differences in the educational value of non-physician healthcare educators perceived by students should be further explored

A Developmental Approach to Internal Medicine Residency Education: Lessons Learned from the Design and Implementation of a Novel Longitudinal Coaching Program

Background: Resident physicians’ achievement of professional competencies requires reflective practice skills and faculty coaching. Graduate medical education programs, however, struggle to operationalize these activities. Objective: To (1) describe the process and strategies for implementing an Internal Medicine (IM) resident coaching program that evolved in response to challenges, (2) characterize residents’ professional learning plans (PLPs) and their alignment with EPAs, and, (3) examine key lessons learned. Design: The program began in 2013 and involved all postgraduate years (PGY) residents (n = 60, 100%), and 20 faculty coaches who were all IM trained and practicing in an IM-related specialty. One coach was linked with 3–4 residents for three years. Through 1:1 meetings, resident-coach pairs identified professional challenges (‘disorienting dilemmas’ or ‘worst days’), reviewed successes (‘best days’), and co-created professional learning plans. Typed summaries were requested following meetings. Coaches met monthly for professional development and to discuss program challenges/successes, which informed programmatic improvements; additionally, a survey was distributed after three program years. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Results: Disorienting dilemmas and professional learning plans mapped to all 16 EPAs and four additional themes: work–life balance, career planning, teaching skills, and research/scholarship. The most-frequently mapped topics included: PGY1 – leading and working within interprofessional care teams (EPA 10), research and scholarship, and work–life balance; PGY2 – improving quality of care (EPA 13), demonstrating personal habits of lifelong learning (EPA15), and research and scholarship; PGY3 – lifelong learning (EPA15); career planning was common across all years. Conclusions: Lessons learned included challenges in coordination of observations, identifying disorienting dilemmas, and creating a shared mental model between residents, faculty, and program leadership. The coaching program resulted in professional learning plans aligned with IM EPAs, in addition to other professional development topics. Operationalization of aspects of these results can inform the development of similar programs in residency education