ABSTRACT:The last 10 years have seen an increase in union representation for residents and fellows across the United States. It is estimated that 15% of residents and fellows are represented by unions. With increasing numbers of U.S. residents and fellows in graduate medical education (GME) programs being represented by unions, the authors contend that it is worthwhile to consider the benefits and potential drawbacks of resident unions and how GME and health system leaders can best work to ensure that the educational needs of residents continue to be emphasized in an era of resident unionization. Union bargaining can be a method to secure salary increases and other benefits for residents. Unionization can also provide a mechanism for more rapidly addressing worker protection issues and allows residents to advocate on behalf of patients. Residents participating as union leaders may develop important leadership and negotiation skills as well as gain beneficial knowledge about health system structure, financing, and priorities. However, with all the possible benefits that may come with resident unionization, there are also potential pitfalls. The collective bargaining process may create an adversarial relationship between program and institution leaders and trainees. Additionally, while residents are considered employees and able to collectively bargain, the National Labor Relations Board has also acknowledged that residents are "students learning their chosen medical craft." Program and institution leaders have an obligation to prioritize resident education and adhere to accreditation requirements even when these requirements conflict with union demands. Furthermore, because of the obligation to protect the public, program leaders should maintain control of resident academic due process issues. Program and institutional leaders must continue to prioritize resident education. Furthermore, GME leaders have a joint responsibility to create clinical learning environments that are conducive to quality patient care and promote resident learning and well-being.

Background Equitable assessment is critical in competency-based medical education. This study explores differences in key characteristics of qualitative assessments (i.e., narrative comments or assessment feedback) of internal medicine postgraduate resident performance associated with gender and race and ethnicity. Methods Analysis of narrative comments included in faculty assessments of resident performance from six internal medicine residency programs was conducted. Content analysis was used to assess two key characteristics of comments- valence (overall positive or negative orientation) and specificity (detailed nature and actionability of comment) – via a blinded, multi-analyst approach. Differences in comment valence and specificity with gender and race and ethnicity were assessed using multilevel regression, controlling for multiple covariates including quantitative competency ratings. Results Data included 3,383 evaluations with narrative comments by 597 faculty of 698 residents, including 45% of comments about women residents and 13.2% about residents who identified with race and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine. Most comments were moderately specific and positive. Comments about women residents were more positive (estimate 0.06, p 0.045) but less specific (estimate − 0.07, p 0.002) compared to men. Women residents were more likely to receive non-specific, weakly specific or no comments (adjusted OR 1.29, p 0.012) and less likely to receive highly specific comments (adjusted OR 0.71, p 0.003) or comments with specific examples of things done well or areas for growth (adjusted OR 0.74, p 0.003) than men. Gendered differences in comment specificity and valence were most notable early in training. Comment specificity and valence did not differ with resident race and ethnicity (specificity: estimate 0.03, p 0.32; valence: estimate − 0.05, p 0.26) or faculty gender (specificity: estimate 0.06, p 0.15; valence: estimate 0.02 p 0.54). Conclusion There were significant differences in the specificity and valence of qualitative assessments associated with resident gender with women receiving more praising but less specific and actionable comments. This suggests a lost opportunity for well-rounded assessment feedback to the disadvantage of women.

PurposeCompetency-based medical education relies on equitable assessment. This study examined the influence of faculty and trainee gender on assessments of internal medicine (IM) resident performance over time. MethodA longitudinal analysis of clinical performance assessments from 7 U.S. IM residency programs (July 2014-June 2019) was conducted. Core competency scores (patient care [PC], medical knowledge [MK], practice-based learning and improvement [PBLI], systems-based practice [SBP], professionalism [PROF], and interpersonal and communication skills [ICS]) were standardized across programs. Cross-classified mixed-effects linear regression evaluated the relationship between gender and standardized competency scores within training programs, while adjusting for multiple variables including IM In Training Examination percentile rank. ResultsData included 9,346 evaluations by 1,011 faculty (552 [55%] men, 459 [45%] women) for 664 residents (358 [54%] men, 306 [46%] women). Initially, women residents' scores were significantly lower than men's in PC (estimated difference [standard error], -0.097 [0.033]; P = .004), MK (-0.145 [0.034], P < .001), and PBLI (-0.090 [0.040], P = .022). PC, MK, PBLI, and SBP scores increased more over time for women residents than men (PC: 0.050 [0.015], P = .001; MK: 0.052 [0.015], P = .001; PBLI: 0.036 [0.018], P = .048; SBP: 0.036 [0.016], P = .027). PROF and ICS scores were comparable across gender. There was a significant interaction between faculty gender and postgraduate year (PGY) across all competencies but none between resident gender, faculty gender, and PGY, indicating that men and women faculty rated residents differently over time but were consistent in how they rated men and women residents. ConclusionsGender-based assessment differences were variable across competencies and time. Women residents had lower scores initially but greater gains in "hard skill" (MK, PC, and PBLI) than in "soft skill" (ICS and PROF) competencies, suggesting assessment inequities. Efforts to ensure equitable assessment are needed.

INTRODUCTION:Evidence suggests gender disparities in medical education assessment, including differences in ratings of competency and narrative comments provided in resident performance assessments. This study explores how gender manifests within the content of qualitative assessments (i.e., narrative comments or performance feedback) of resident performance.METHODS:Qualitative content analysis was used to explore gender-based differences in narrative comments included in faculty assessments of resident performance during inpatient medicine rotations at six Internal Medicine residency programs, 2016-2017. A blinded, multi-analyst approach was employed to identify themes across comments. Patterns in themes with resident gender and post-graduate year (PGY) were explored, focusing on PGY2 and PGY3 when residents are serving in the team leader role.RESULTS:Data included 3,383 evaluations with narrative comments of 385 men (55.2%) and 313 women residents (44.8%). There were thematic differences in narrative comments received by men and women residents and how these themes manifested within comments changed with training time. Compared to men, comments about women had a persistent relationship-orientation and emphasized confidence over training including as interns and in PGY2 and PGY3, when serving as team leader. The relationship-orientation was characterized not only by the residents' communal attributes but also their interpersonal and communication skills, including efforts supporting others and establishing the tone for the team. Comments about women residents often highlighted confidence, including recommendations around behaviors that convey confidence in decision-making and team leadership.DISCUSSION:There were gender-based thematic differences in qualitative assessments. Comments about women resident team leaders highlight relationship building skills and urge confidence and actions that convey confidence as team leader. Persistent attention to communal skills suggests gendered expectations for women resident team leaders and a lost opportunity for well-rounded feedback to the disadvantage of women residents. These findings may inform interventions to promote equitable assessment, such as providing feedback across the competencies.

Alignment between graduate medical education (GME) and health system priorities is foundational to meaningful engagement of residents and fellows in systems improvement work within the clinical learning environment. The Residents and Fellows Leading Interprofessional Continuous Improvement Teams program at the University of California San Francisco was designed over a decade ago to address barriers to trainee participation in health system-based improvement work. The program provides structure and support for health system-aligned trainee-led improvement projects in the clinic learning environment. Project champions (residents/fellows) from GME programs attend workshops where they learn improvement methodologies and develop proposals for health system-based improvement projects for their training programs. Proposals are supported by local faculty mentors and are reviewed and approved by GME and health systems' leaders. During the academic year, teams share their progress using visual management boards and interactive leader rounds. The health system provides a modest financial incentive for successful projects. Since the program's inception, thousands of trainees from 58 residency and fellowship programs have participated either as champions or participants in the program at least once, and in total over 300 projects have been implemented. Approximately three-quarters of the specific improvement goals were met, all projects meaningfully engaged residents and fellows, and many projects continued after the learners graduated. This active partnership between GME and a health system created a symbiotic relationship; trainees received education and support to complete improvement projects, while the health system reaped additional benefits from the alignment and impact of the projects. This partnership continues to grow with steady increases in participating programs, spread to partner health systems, and scholarship for trainees and faculty.

Disparities in objective assessments in graduate medical education such as the In-Training Examination (ITE) that disadvantage women and those self-identifying with race/ethnicities underrepresented in medicine (URiM) are of concern. Examine ITE trends longitudinally across post-graduate year (PGY) with gender and race/ethnicity. Longitudinal analysis of resident ITE metrics at 7 internal medicine residency programs, 2014–2019. ITE trends across PGY of women and URiM residents compared to non-URiM men assessed via ANOVA. Those with ITE scores associated with less than 90% probability of passing the American Board of Internal Medicine certification exam (ABIM-CE) were identified and odds of being identified as at-risk between groups were assessed with chi square. A total of 689 IM residents, including 330 women and URiM residents (48%). ITE score There was a significant difference in ITE score across PGY for women and URiM residents compared to non-URiM men (F(2, 1321) 4.46, p=0.011). Adjusting for program, calendar year, and baseline ITE, women and URiM residents had smaller ITE score gains (adjusted mean change in score between PGY1 and PGY3 (se), non-URiM men 13.1 (0.25) vs women and URiM residents 11.4 (0.28), p<0.001). Women and URiM residents had greater odds of being at potential risk for not passing the ABIM-CE (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.78) with greatest odds in PGY3 (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.54 to 6.37). Differences in ITE over training were associated with resident gender and race/ethnicity. Women and URiM residents had smaller ITE score gains across PGY translating into greater odds of potentially being seen as at-risk for not passing the ABIM-CE. Differences in ITE over training may reflect differences in experiences of women and URiM residents during training and may lead to further disparities.

Purpose To assess the association between internal medicine (IM) residents' race/ethnicity and clinical performance assessments. Method The authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of clinical performance assessment scores at 6 U.S. IM residency programs from 2016 to 2017. Residents underrepresented in medicine (URiM) were identified using self-reported race/ethnicity. Standardized scores were calculated for Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies. Cross-classified mixed-effects regression assessed the association between race/ethnicity and competency scores, adjusting for rotation time of year and setting; resident gender, postgraduate year, and IM In-Training Examination percentile rank; and faculty gender, rank, and specialty. Results Data included 3,600 evaluations by 605 faculty of 703 residents, including 94 (13.4%) URiM residents. Resident race/ethnicity was associated with competency scores, with lower scores for URiM residents (difference in adjusted standardized scores between URiM and non-URiM residents, mean [standard error]) in medical knowledge (-0.123 [0.05], P = .021), systems-based practice (-0.179 [0.05], P = .005), practice-based learning and improvement (-0.112 [0.05], P = .032), professionalism (-0.116 [0.06], P = .036), and interpersonal and communication skills (-0.113 [0.06], P = .044). Translating this to a 1 to 5 scale in 0.5 increments, URiM resident ratings were 0.07 to 0.12 points lower than non-URiM resident ratings in these 5 competencies. The interaction with faculty gender was notable in professionalism (difference between URiM and non-URiM for men faculty -0.199 [0.06] vs women faculty -0.014 [0.07], P = .01) with men more than women faculty rating URiM residents lower than non-URiM residents. Using the 1 to 5 scale, men faculty rated URiM residents 0.13 points lower than non-URiM residents in professionalism. Conclusions Resident race/ethnicity was associated with assessment scores to the disadvantage of URiM residents. This may reflect bias in faculty assessment, effects of a noninclusive learning environment, or structural inequities in assessment.

Original Investigation Internal Medicine Chief Resident Administrative, Educational, and Clinical Experiences Megha Garg, MD, MPH; Tejaswi Kompala, MD; Michael Hurley, MD, MS; Lenny López, MD, MPH, MDiv

Introduction To advance in their clinical roles, residents must earn supervisors’ trust. Research on supervisor trust in the inpatient setting has identified learner, supervisor, relationship, context, and task factors that influence trust. However, trust in the continuity clinic setting, where resident roles, relationships, and context differ, is not well understood. We aimed to explore how preceptors in the continuity clinic setting develop trust in internal medicine residents and how trust influences supervision. Methods In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with faculty preceptors from two continuity clinic sites in an internal medicine residency program at an urban academic medical center in the United States from August 2018–June 2020. We analyzed transcripts using thematic analysis with sensitizing concepts related to the theoretical framework of the five factors of trust. Results Sixteen preceptors participated. We identified four key drivers of trust and supervision in the continuity clinic setting: 1) longitudinal resident-preceptor-patient relationships, 2) direct observations of continuity clinic skills, 3) resident attitude towards their primary care physician role, and 4) challenging context and task factors influencing supervision. Preceptors shared challenges to determining trust stemming from incomplete knowledge about patients and limited opportunities to directly observe and supervise between-visit care. Discussion The continuity clinic setting offers unique supports and challenges to trust development and trust-supervision alignment. Maximizing resident-preceptor-patient continuity, promoting direct observation, and improving preceptor supervision of residents’ provision of between-visit care may improve resident continuity clinic learning and patient care.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the association of gender with assessment of internal medicine residents.

BACKGROUND:Competency-based medical education relies on meaningful resident assessment. Implicit gender bias represents a potential threat to the integrity of resident assessment. We sought to examine the available evidence of the potential for and impact of gender bias in resident assessment in graduate medical education. METHODS:A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the presence and influence of gender bias on resident assessment. We searched Medline and Embase databases to capture relevant articles using a tiered strategy. Review was conducted by two independent, blinded reviewers. We included studies with primary objective of examining the impact of gender on resident assessment in graduate medical education in the USA or Canada published from 1998 to 2018. RESULTS:Nine studies examined the existence and influence of gender bias in resident assessment and data included rating scores and qualitative comments. Heterogeneity in tools, outcome measures, and methodologic approach precluded meta-analysis. Five of the nine studies reported a difference in outcomes attributed to gender including gender-based differences in traits ascribed to residents, consistency of feedback, and performance measures. CONCLUSION:Our review suggests that gender bias poses a potential threat to the integrity of resident assessment in graduate medical education. Future study is warranted to understand how gender bias manifests in resident assessment, impact on learners and approaches to mitigate this bias.

Background: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a practical means to address substance misuse in primary care. Important barriers to implementing SBIRT include adequacy of training and provider confidence as well as logistical hurdles and time constraints. A faculty development initiative aimed at increasing SBIRT knowledge and treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) should lead to increased use of SBIRT by faculty and the residents they teach. This study examined how a faculty development program to promote SBIRT influenced faculty practice and resident teaching. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of faculty exposed to multiple SBIRT educational interventions over a 5-year period in an academic faculty-resident general medicine practice. Participants completed a brief online survey followed by a semistructured interview. Quantitative responses were examined descriptively. Qualitative questions were reviewed to identify key themes. Results: Fifteen of 29 faculty (52%) completed the survey and 13 (45%) completed the interviews regarding faculty development interventions. Faculty thought that SBIRT was an important skill and had confidence in screening for substance use disorders, although confidence in making treatment referrals and prescribing pharmacotherapy were rated lower. Many faculty reported screening more frequently for SUDs after attending faculty development sessions. However, several reported that the training did not improve their SBIRT teaching to residents during clinic precepting sessions. To improve uptake of SBIRT, a majority of faculty recommended electronic health record (EHR) alerts. Conclusions: SBIRT is a highly valued set of skills, and training may enhance rates of screening for substance misuse. However, participants did not report a substantial change in SBIRT teaching as a result of faculty development. In the future, small, targeted faculty development sessions, potentially involving strategies for using the electronic health record (EHR), may be an effective way to enhance primary care SBIRT skills.

Problem: Training the next generation of health professionals requires leaders, innovators, and scholars in education. Although many medical schools and residencies offer education electives or tracks focused on developing teaching skills, these programs often omit educational innovation, scholarship, and leadership and are narrowly targeted to one level of learner. Intervention: The University of California San Francisco created the Health Professions Education Pathway for medical students, residents, and fellows as well as learners from other health professional schools. The Pathway applies the theoretical framework of communities of practice in its curricular design to promote learner identity formation as future health professions educators. It employs the strategies of engagement, imagination, and alignment for identity formation. Context: Through course requirements, learners engage and work with members of the educator community of practice to develop the knowledge and skills required to participate in the community. Pathway instructors are faculty members who model a breadth of educator careers to help learners imagine personal trajectories. Last, learners complete mentored education projects, adopting scholarly methods and ethics to align with the broader educator community of practice. Outcome: From 2009 to 2014, 117 learners participated in the Pathway. Program evaluations, graduate surveys, and web-based searches revealed positive impacts on learner career development. Learners gained knowledge and skills for continued engagement with the educator community of practice, confirmed their career aspirations (imagination), joined an educator-in-training community (engagement/imagination), and disseminated via scholarly meetings and peer-reviewed publications (alignment). Lessons Learned: Learners identified engagement with the learner community as the most powerful aspect of the Pathway; it provided peer support for imagining and navigating the development of their dual identities in the clinician and educator communities of practice. Also important for learner success was alignment of their projects with the goals of the local educator community of practice. Our community of practice approach to educator career development has shown promising early outcomes by nurturing learners' passion for teaching; expanding their interest in educational leadership, innovation, and scholarship; and focusing on their identity formation as future educators.

BACKGROUND:Providing a robust continuity clinic experience is difficult due to uneven distribution of resident time. Immersion experiences early in training may improve residents' learning experiences.OBJECTIVE:We designed and implemented a continuity immersion experience to improve internal medicine interns' satisfaction and confidence with their outpatient skills, and we evaluated the timing of the experience and its benefits for learners.METHODS:Two cohorts of interns at 1 academic institution participated in a 3-week immersion block (during the first or second quarter of the intern year). Interns were surveyed twice about satisfaction and confidence. Analysis included independent and paired sample t tests to compare interns' responses pre- and postimmersion, and to evaluate effects over time.RESULTS:A total of 124 interns completed the immersion, with a survey response rate of 61%. Interns' self-rated confidence on a 5-point Likert scale improved significantly compared with preimmersion in the areas of medical knowledge and confidence with their electronic health record and communication skills (P ≤ .010 for all assessments). Interns reported high satisfaction with continuity clinic following immersion (cohort 1: 4.5 ± 0.54; cohort 2: 4.3 ± 0.68; on a 5-point scale with 5 = very satisfied). Improvements in knowledge, skills, and satisfaction in cohort 1 were sustained over 3 months.CONCLUSIONS:A 3-week immersion experience in the first 6 months of residency improved interns' confidence in ambulatory content areas and satisfaction with clinic.