The Current State of Antiracism Curricula in Undergraduate and Graduate Medical Education: A Qualitative Study of US Academic Health Centers.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to evaluate the current state of pedagogy on antiracism, including barriers to implementation and strengths of existing curricula, in undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME) programs in US academic health centers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with an exploratory qualitative approach using semistructured interviews. Participants were leaders of UME and GME programs at 5 institutions participating in the Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement program and 6 affiliated sites from November 2021 to April 2022. RESULTS: A total of 29 program leaders from the 11 academic health centers participated in this study. Three participants from 2 institutions reported the implementation of robust, intentional, and longitudinal antiracism curricula. Nine participants from 7 institutions described race and antiracism-related topics integrated into health equity curricula. Only 9 participants reported having "adequately trained" faculty. Participants mentioned individual, systemic, and structural barriers to implementing antiracism-related training in medical education such as institutional inertia and insufficient resources. Fear related to introducing an antiracism curriculum and undervaluing of this curriculum relative to other content were identified. Through learners and faculty feedback, antiracism content was evaluated and included in UME and GME curricula. Most participants identified learners as a stronger voice for transformation than faculty; antiracism content was mainly included in health equity curricula. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of antiracism in medical education requires intentional training, focused institutional policies, enhanced foundational awareness of the impact of racism on patients and communities, and changes at the level of institutions and accreditation bodies.

Introducing integrative primary health care to an interprofessional audience: Feasibility and impact of an asynchronous online course.

BACKGROUND: Although there is mounting clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting integrative healthcare (IH), a significant knowledge gap hinders widespread adoption by primary care professionals. INTERVENTION: Based on IH competencies developed by an interprofessional team and a needs assessment, a 32-h online interprofessional IH course, Foundations in Integrative Health, was developed. Trainees learn to conduct an IH assessment and how patients are assessed and treated from the diverse professions in integrative primary care. METHODS: The course was pilot-tested with educational program trainees, faculty and clinical staff at graduate level primary care training programs (primary care residencies, nursing, pharmacy, public health, behavioral health, and licensed complementary and IH programs). OUTCOME MEASURES: Prior to and following the course, participants completed an IH knowledge test, an IH efficacy self-assessment, and validated measures of IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, patient involvement, resiliency, self-care, wellness behaviors, and wellbeing. Evaluation surveys were administered following each unit and the course. RESULTS: Almost one-half (n = 461/982, 47%) completed the course. Pre/post course improvements in IH knowledge, IH self-efficacy, IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, resiliency, self-care, several wellness behaviors, and wellbeing were observed. The course was positively evaluated with most (93%) indicating interest in applying IH principles and that the course enhanced their educational experience (92%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a multi-site, online curriculum for introducing IH to a diverse group of primary care professionals. Primary care training programs have the ability to offer an interprofessional, IH curriculum with limited on-site faculty expertise.

Leveraging Collective Impact to Promote Health Equity.

The purpose of this paper is to describe how the Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement (AU-PCTE) used the Collective Impact Model to promote health equity. The Collective Impact Model and its five conditions provided a framework for the Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement (AU-PCTE), representing multiple universities in the United States, to promote health equity. Through the establishment of shared measurement, continuous communication, mutually reinforcing activities, and the guidance of the backbone support organization, the work of each AU contributed to the collective impact on health equity. It is important to underscore that collective impact is an iterative process with both challenges and successes.

Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement: Improving Evidence and Training to Strengthen Primary Care.

The primary care workforce is an essential component of any high-functioning health care system. The Health Resources and Services Administration awarded six Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement grants in 2016. The overarching goal of the program is to improve primary care clinical teaching and research to strengthen the primary care workforce. Academic Units achieve this goal through 1) systems-level research to inform primary care training; 2) dissemination of best practices and resources; and 3) community of practice activities to promote the widespread enhancement of primary care training to produce a diverse, high-quality primary care workforce.

A Framework for Transforming Primary Care Health Care Professions Education and Training to Promote Health Equity.

A diverse and well-trained, distributed and resourced primary care workforce is essential for advancing health equity. However, few standardized models exist to guide health care professions education (HCPE) on core competencies regarding understanding and effectively addressing social determinants of health, social injustice, structural barriers, and the high burden of health needs in marginalized populations. We propose a framework with domains of policies and incentives, enabling institutional climate, educational content and integration, and community-orientation and community engagement. The framework encompasses inter-disciplinary team-based care and immersive community experiences to equip learners with cognitive skills and knowledge needed to understand and address unmet needs and ensure equitable access to the entire continuum of care. Research is needed to understand barriers and promoters of a health equity-guided HCPE, and standards for theory-driven curricular contents and metrics to evaluate and track progress. Multisector collaborations and demonstration projects may help guide standardized training on advancing health equity.

Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education: Implementation Analysis.

In September 2012, the Health Resources and Services Administration funded 12 preventive medicine residency programs to participate in a 2-year project aimed at incorporating integrative medicine (IM) into their residency training programs. The grantees were asked to incorporate competencies for IM into their respective preventive medicine residency curricula and to provide for faculty development in IM. The analysis conducted in 2014-2015 used the following evidence to assess residency programs' achievements and challenges in implementation: progress and performance measures reports, curriculum mapping of program activities to IM competencies, records of webinar participation, and post-project individual semi-structured phone interviews with the 12 grantee project leaders. Key findings are: (1) IM activities offered to residents increased by 50% during the 2 years; (2) Accessing IM resources already in existence at local grantee sites was the primary facilitator of moving the integration of IM into preventive medicine residencies forward; (3) Among all activities offered residents, rotations were perceived by grantees as by far the most valuable contributor to acquiring IM competencies; (4) Online training was considered a greater contributor to preventive medicine residents' medical knowledge in IM than faculty lectures or courses; (5) Faculty were offered a rich variety of opportunities for professional development in IM, but some programs lacked a system to ensure faculty participation; and (6) Perceived lack of evidence for IM was a barrier to full program implementation at some sites. Grantees expect implemented programs to continue post-funding, but with decreased intensity owing to perceived faculty and curriculum time constraints.

Interprofessional Competencies in Integrative Primary Healthcare.

In October 2014, the National Center for Integrative Primary Healthcare (NCIPH) was launched as a collaboration between the University of Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine and the Academic Consortium for Integrative Health and Medicine and supported by a grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration. A primary goal of the NCIPH is to develop a core set of integrative healthcare (IH) competencies and educational programs that will span the interprofessional primary care training and practice spectra and ultimately become a required part of primary care education. This article reports on the first phase of the NCIPH effort, which focused on the development of a shared set of competencies in IH for primary care disciplines. The process of development, refinement, and adoption of 10 "meta-competencies" through a collaborative process involving a diverse interprofessional team is described. Team members represent nursing, the primary care medicine professions, pharmacy, public health, acupuncture, naturopathy, chiropractic, nutrition, and behavioral medicine. Examples of the discipline-specific sub-competencies being developed within each of the participating professions are provided, along with initial results of an assessment of potential barriers and facilitators of adoption within each discipline. The competencies presented here will form the basis of a 45-hour online curriculum produced by the NCIPH for use in primary care training programs that will be piloted in a wide range of programs in early 2016 and then revised for wider use over the following year.

En octubre de 2014, se inauguró el Centro nacional de atención primaria integral de salud (National Center for Integrative Primary Healthcare, NCIPH) como una colaboración entre el Centro de medicina integral de la Universidad de Arizona y el Consorcio académico de salud y medicina integral, y fue subvencionado con fondos de la Administración de Recursos y Servicios de Salud. El objetivo principal del NCIPH es desarrollar un conjunto básico de competencias de asistencia sanitaria integral (SI) y programas educativos que abarquen los espectros de formación y práctica en atención primaria interprofesional y se integren en última instancia en la educación en atención primaria. Este artículo detalla la primera fase de la iniciativa del NCIPH, que se centra en el desarrollo de un conjunto de competencias compartidas en asistencia sanitaria integral para las disciplinas de atención primaria. Se describe un proceso de desarrollo, perfeccionamiento y adopción de 10 "metacompetencias" a través de un proceso de colaboración en el que participa un equipo interprofesional heterogéneo. Los miembros del equipo representan al personal de enfermería, las profesiones médicas de atención primaria, farmacia, salud pública, acupuntura, naturopatía, quiropráctica, nutrición y medicina de la conducta. Se ofrecen ejemplos de las subcompetencias específicas de cada disciplina en fase de desarrollo en cada una de las profesiones participantes, junto con los resultados iniciales de la evaluación de los posibles obstáculos y los facilitadores de la adopción dentro de cada disciplina. Las competencias que se presentan aquí constituirán la base de un plan de estudios en línea de 45 horas elaborado por el NCIPH para su uso en programas de formación en atención primaria que se pondrán a prueba a principios de 2016 y serán posteriormente revisados para la generalización de su uso el año siguiente.

An integrative review of nursing workforce studies.

The purpose of this chapter is to present an analysis of selected published nursing workforce studies published between the years of 2005 and 2010. Thirteen nursing workforce studies were reviewed and analyzed using a modification of the method suggested by Ganong (1987). Nursing workforce studies were selected based on the following criteria: (1) the date of publication was between the years of 2005 and 2010; (2) the primary focus was on nurses working in practice; or, as students or faculty in nursing educational programs. When reviewed, the 13 studies (1) lacked uniform measures among databases; (2) lacked longitudinal studies that followed the respondent over time from the beginning of their career to retirement; (3) had response rates that contributed to small sample sizes or sampling frame that did not take into consideration all characteristics of interest; (4) lacked attention to an interdisciplinary mix of providers; and (5) implied the need for future study on intergenerational characteristics due to shifting demographics in the profession and nursing workforce.