Health Professional vs Layperson Values and Preferences on Scarce Resource Allocation.

Importance: COVID-19 prompted rapid development of scarce resource allocation (SRA) policies to be implemented if demand eclipsed health systems' ability to provide critical care. While SRA policies follow general ethical frameworks, understanding priorities of those affected by policies and/or tasked with implementing them is critical. Objective: To evaluate whether community members and health care profesionals (HCP) agree with SRA protocols at the University of California (UC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used social media and community-partnered engagement to recruit participants to a web-based survey open to all participants aged older than 18 years who wished to enroll. This study was fielded between May and September 2020 and queried participants' values and preferences on draft SRA policy tenets. Participants were also encouraged to forward the survey to their networks for snowball sampling. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to January 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey items assessed values and preferences, graded on Likert scales. Agreement was tabulated as difference in Likert points between expressed opinion and policy tenets. Descriptive statistics were tested for significance by HCP status. Free text responses were analyzed using applied rapid qualitative analysis. Results: A total of 1545 participants aged older than 18 years (mean [SD] age 49 [16] years; 1149 female participants [74%], 478 health care practitioners [30%]) provided data on SRA values and preferences. Agreement with UC SRA policy as drafted was moderately high among respondents, ranging from 67% to 83% across domains. Higher agreement with the interim policy was observed for laypersons across all domains except health-related factors. HCPs agreed more strongly on average that resources should not be allocated to those less likely to survive (HCP mean, 3.70; 95% CI, 3.16-3.59; vs layperson mean, 3.38; 95% CI, 3.17-3.59; P = .002), and were more in favor of reallocating life support from patients less likely to those more likely to survive (HCP mean, 6.41; 95% CI, 6.15-6.67; vs layperson mean, 5.40; 95% CI, 5.23-5.58; P < .001). Transparency and trust building themes were common in free text responses and highly rated on scaled items. Conclusions and Relevance: This survey of SRA policy values found moderate agreement with fundamental principles of such policies. Engagement with communities affected by SRA policy should continue in iterative refinement in preparation for future crises.

Contemporary Trends in the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Match and the Effects of COVID-19.

Objective: We aimed to elucidate associations between geographic location, size, and ranking of medical schools that orthopaedic surgery residents graduate from and the residencies that they match both pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 pandemic by examining the 2017 to 2022 orthopaedic surgery residency cohorts. Methods: Demographics were extracted using Doximity Residency Navigator platform, the 2021 US News and World Report, and program websites. Medical schools were classified as large if they had >613 medical students. Postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) (2021 match) and PGY-2 (2022 match) residents were classified as the COVID-19 cohort. Location was categorized as Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. Chi-square tests, Cohen's H value, and descriptive statistics were used for analysis with statistical significance set at p <0.05. Results: Four thousand two hundred forty-three residents from 160 accredited US orthopaedic residency programs (78.4%) were included. Northeastern applicants were most likely to match in the same region (p <0.01), and southern applicants were most likely to match at their home program (p <0.001). Applicants affected by the COVID-19 pandemic did not differ from their predecessors with regards to matching to the same region (p = 0.637) or home program (p = 0.489). Applicants from public medical schools were more likely to match in the same region and at their home program (p <0.001), whereas those from private medical schools were more likely to match at top-ranked residencies (p <0.001). Students from both top 25- and top 50-ranked medical schools were more likely to match at their home program (p <0.01) and attend top 20-ranked residency programs (p <0.0001). Conclusion: These results demonstrate significant associations between matched residencies and attended medical schools' geographic location, school type, and ranking. During the pandemic, geographic trends were overall unchanged, whereas residents from large or lower-ranked schools were more likely to match at home programs, and those from private or top-ranked schools were less likely to attend top residencies.

Fixing a Broken Clerkship Assessment Process: Reflections on Objectivity and Equity Following the USMLE Step 1 Change to Pass/Fail.

Clerkship grading is a core feature of evaluation for medical students' skills as physicians and is considered by most residency program directors to be an indicator of future performance and success. With the transition of the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score to pass/fail, there will likely be even greater reliance on clerkship grades, which raises several important issues that need to be urgently addressed. This article details the current landscape of clerkship grading and the systemic discrepancies in assessment and allocation of honors. The authors examine not only objectivity and fairness in clerkship grading but also the reliability of clerkship grading in predicting residency performance and the potential benefits and drawbacks to adoption of a pass/fail clinical clerkship grading system. In the promotion of a more fair and equitable residency selection process, there must be standardization of grading systems with consideration of explicit grading criteria, grading committees, and/or structured education of evaluators and assessors regarding implicit bias. In addition, greater adherence and enforcement of transparency in grade distributions in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation is needed. These changes have the potential to level the playing field, foster equitable comparisons, and ultimately add more fairness to the residency selection process.

Application of behavioral economics for understanding health behaviors among adolescents and young adults.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Behavioral economics (BE) concepts have become well studied tools in addressing patient issues, such as weight loss, smoking cessation, and medication adherence. Although predominantly studied in adult populations, emerging literature has shown BE's utility for adolescent/young adult (AYA) populations, offering a practical framework to safeguard AYA health and influence healthy decision making. RECENT FINDINGS: We identified substantive areas in which BE concepts have been applied in AYA populations (e.g., substance use) and outline how these concepts have been used as a tool to identify individuals at risk for poor outcomes and to leverage behavioral insights to improve health behaviors. SUMMARY: BE research holds significant promise as a tool for clinicians and researchers to encourage healthy decision making in AYA populations. Yet, there are opportunities for BE research to expand further into current trends impacting adolescent health, such as electronic nicotine delivery systems, social media apps, and coronavirus disease 2019 vaccinations. Furthermore, the full degree of BE utility remains to be explored, as few studies demonstrate the translation of associative findings into direct interventions. Additional work is needed to formalize BE techniques into best practices that clinicians can implement in their daily practice.

Integration of a new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases through blended learning.

PURPOSE: In recent years, dental education has experienced a general shift toward an increased technology presence in education delivery and learning. This research examines the student-perceived efficacy of a blended learning approach (mixture of online content and face-to-face instruction) in a predoctoral periodontics curriculum to teach a new periodontal classification scheme to dental students in clinical training. METHODS: Participants were recruited from third- and fourth-year predoctoral periodontal classes at the University of Washington School of Dentistry. Students were administered a live lecture introducing the new classification system and given access to an online module with built in case quizzes and interactive activities. Upon completing the module, students were given a post-module survey to assess learning preferences, utilization of various learning methods, and student-perceived efficacy of blended learning. RESULTS: In a study group of 69 predoctoral dental students, the online module was the most preferred (52.2% ranked first) and utilized learning method for students (p < 0.001). Over 80% of students agreed or strongly agreed that they enjoyed using it and found it more effective than traditional lecture alone. Traditional lecture was preferred by 31.9% of students, and no students ranked the assigned reading as their first choice of learning method (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate higher student preference, utilization, and self-perceived efficacy of blended learning as compared to traditional assigned readings and lectures - supporting blended learning as a promising educational approach for predoctoral dental education.

Impact of interhospital transfer on clinical outcomes and costs of extracorporeal life support.

BACKGROUND: The impact of interhospital transfers for extracorporeal life support have not been studied in large datasets. The present study sought to determine the impact of such patient transfers on survival, complications, and hospitalization costs. METHODS: The 2010 to 2016 database of the National Inpatient Sample was used to identify all adults who underwent extracorporeal life support. Patients were categorized based on whether or not they were transferred to another facility. Trend analysis and multivariable models were used to characterize the impact of inter hospital transfer on in-hospital mortality, complications, duration of stay, and costs. RESULTS: Of an estimated 29,298 extracorporeal life support hospitalizations during the study period, 36.8% were transferred from an outside facility. Extracorporeal life support hospitalizations experienced a 7-fold increase with no difference in mortality between transferred and not transferred cohorts in 2016 (4.79% vs 4.79%, P = .97). Mortality rates were less for patients transferred to high volume centers compared to low volume hospitals (48.7% vs 51.6%, P < .001). Transfer to a low volume hospital for cardiogenic shock was associated with greater odds of mortality (adjusted odds Rratio: 2.25, confidence interval 1.01-5.03). CONCLUSION: Utilization of extracorporeal life support in both transferred and not transferred patients has statistically significantly increased with a decrement in mortality for those transferred. Survival in the transferred cohort is strongly associated with extracorporeal life support procedure volume of the center and this must be taken into account when considering extracorporeal life support transfer.

National Trends in Readmission and Resource Utilization After Pancreatectomy in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatectomy is a complex operation that has been associated with excess morbidity and mortality. Although acute index outcomes have been characterized, there are limited data available on nonelective readmission after pancreatic surgery. We sought to identify factors associated with 30-day and 30- to 90-day readmission after pancreatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We utilized the National Readmissions Database between 2010 and 2016 to identify adults who underwent a pancreatectomy. The primary outcomes were 30-day (30DR) and 30- to 90-day (90DR) readmission. Secondary outcomes included nonelective readmission trends, diagnosis, length of stay, charges, and mortality. RESULTS: Of an estimated 130,267 subjects undergoing pancreatectomy, 97% survived index hospitalization. Eighteen percent of patients had nonelective 30DR while 5.6% experienced 90DR. Readmission at the two time points remained stable during the study period. After adjusting for institution, pancreatectomy volume, mortality (2.0% versus 4.9%, P < 0.001), 30DR length of stay (7.3 d versus 7.8 d, P < 0.001), and 90DR rates (6.9% versus 8.1%, P = 0.003) were significantly decreased at high-volume pancreatectomy centers compared to low-volume hospitals. Discharge to a skilled nursing facility (AOR: 1.52) or with home health care (AOR: 1.2) was associated with 30DR (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing total pancreatectomy (AOR: 1.3) or those with a substance use disorder (AOR: 1.4) among others were associated with 90DR (P ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Readmissions are common and costly after pancreatectomy. Approximately 20% of patients experience readmission within 30 d. 30DR and 90DR rates remained stable during the study. Pancreatectomy at a high-volume center was associated with decreased mortality and 90DR. The present analysis confirms associations between pancreatectomy volume, postsurgical complications, comorbidities, and readmission.