Surgeons Have an Implicit Preference for Specific Disease Over Nonspecific Illness.

BACKGROUND: Many symptoms are not associated with a specific, measurable pathophysiology. Such nonspecific illnesses may carry relative social stigma that biases humans in favor of specific diseases. Such a bias could lead musculoskeletal surgeons to diagnose a specific disease in the absence of a specific, measurable pathology, resulting in potential overdiagnosis and overtreatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What factors are associated with surgeon implicit preference for specific disease over nonspecific illness? (2) What factors are associated with surgeon explicit preference for specific disease over nonspecific illness? (3) Is there a relationship between surgeon implicit and explicit preferences for specific disease over nonspecific illness? METHODS: One hundred three members of the Science of Variation Group participated in a survey-based experiment that included an Implicit Associations Test (IAT) to assess implicit preferences for specific, measurable musculoskeletal pathophysiology (specific disease) compared with symptoms that are not associated with a specific, measurable pathophysiology (nonspecific illness), and a set of four simple, face valid numerical ratings of explicit preferences. The Science of Variation Group is an international collaborative of mostly United States and European (85% [88 of 103] in this study), mostly academic (83% [85 of 103]), and mostly fracture and upper extremity surgeons (83% [86 of 103]), among whom approximately 200 surgeons complete at least one survey per year. The human themes addressed in this study are likely relatively consistent across these variations. Although concerns have been raised about the validity and utility of the IAT, we believe this was the right tool, given that the timed delays in association that form the basis of the measurement likely represent bias and social stigma regarding nonspecific illness. Both measures were scaled from -150, which represents a preference for nonspecific illness, to 150, which represents a preference for specific disease. The magnitude of associations can be assessed relative to the standard deviation or interquartile range. We used multivariable linear regression to identify surgeon factors associated with surgeon implicit and explicit preference for specific disease or nonspecific illness. We measured the relationship between surgeon implicit and explicit preferences for specific disease or nonspecific illness using Spearman correlation. RESULTS: Overall, there was a notable implicit bias in favor of specific diseases over nonspecific illness (median [IQR] 70 [54 to 88]; considered notable because the mean value is above zero [neutral] by more than twice the magnitude of the IQR), with a modestly greater association in the hand and wrist subspecialty. We found no clinically important explicit preference between specific disease and nonspecific illness (median 8 [-15 to 37]; p = 0.02). There was no correlation between explicit preference and implicit bias regarding specific disease and nonspecific illness (Spearman correlation coefficient -0.13; p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Given that our study found an implicit bias among musculoskeletal specialists toward specific diseases over nonspecific illness, future research might address the degree to which this bias may account, in part, for patterns of use of low-yield diagnostic testing and the use of diagnostic labels that imply specific pathophysiology when none is detectable. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients and clinicians might limit overtesting, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment by anticipating an implicit preference for a specific disease and intentionally anchoring on nonspecific illness until a specific pathophysiology accounting for symptoms is identified, and also by using nonspecific illness descriptions until objective, verifiable pathophysiology is identified.

Duty Hours on Surgery Clerkship: From Compliance Nightmare to Leadership and Professional Development Opportunity.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of an innovative leadership development initiative in the core surgery clerkship that addressed duty hours compliance and time-off requests. DESIGN: A combination of deductive and inductive analysis of medical student reflections written after rotating on Acute Care Surgery over 2 academic years (2019-2020 and 2020-2021) was performed. Reflections were part of criteria to receive honors and a prompt was given to discuss their experience in creating their own call schedules. We utilized a combined deductive and inductive process to identify predominant themes within the reflections. Once established, we quantitatively identified frequency and density of themes cited, along with qualitative analysis to determine barriers and lessons learned. SETTING: Dell Seton Medical Center, Dell Medical School at The University of Texas at Austin, a tertiary academic facility. PARTICIPANTS: There were 96 students who rotated on Acute Care Surgery during the study period, 64 (66.7%) of whom completed the reflection piece. RESULTS: We identified 10 predominant themes through the combined deductive and inductive processes. Barriers were cited by most students (n = 58, 91%), with communication being the most commonly discussed theme when cited with a mean 1.96 references per student. Learned leadership skills included: communication, independence, teamwork, negotiating skills, reflection of best practices by residents, and realizing the importance of duty hours. CONCLUSIONS: Transferring duty hour scheduling responsibilities to medical students resulted in multiple professional development opportunities while decreasing administrative burden and improving adherence to duty hour requirements. This approach requires further validation, but may be considered at other institutions seeking to improve the leadership and communication skills of its students, while improving adherence to duty hour restrictions.

Measuring what matters: identifying assessments that reflect learning on the core surgical clerkship.

Purpose: There are various assessments used during the core surgical clerkship (CSC), each of which may be influenced by factors external to the CSC or have inherent biases from an equity lens. In particular, the National Board of Medical Examiners' Clinical Subject Exams ("Shelf") is used heavily and may not reflect clerkship curriculum or clinical learning. Methods: This is a retrospective review of medical student characteristics and assessments during the CSC from July 2017-June 2021. Assessment methods included: subjective Clinical Performance Assessments (CPA), Shelf, Objective Structured Clinical Examinations, and a short-answer in-house examination (IHE) culminating in a Final Grade (FG) of Honors/Pass/Fail. A Shelf score threshold for Honors was added in academic years 2020-2021. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariable logistic and linear regression statistics were utilized. Results: We reviewed records of 192 students. Of these, 107 (55.7%) were female, median age was 24 [IQR: 23-26] years, and most were White/Caucasian (N = 106, 55.2%). Univariate analysis showed the number of Exceeds Expectations obtained on CPA to be influenced by surgical subspecialty taken (p = 0.013) and academic year (p < 0.001). Shelf was influenced by students' race (p = 0.009), timing of CSC before or after Internal Medicine (67.9 ± 7.3 vs 72.9 ± 7.1, p < 0.001), and Term taken (increasing from 66.0 ± 8.7 to 73.4 ± 7.5, p < 0.001). IHE scores did not have any external associations. After adjustment with multivariable logistic and linear regressions, CPA and IHE did not have external associations, but higher scores were obtained on Shelf exam in Terms 3, 5, and 6 (by 4.62 [95% CI 0.86-8.37], 4.92 [95% CI 0.53-9.31], and 7.56 [95% CI 2.81-12.31] points, respectively. Odds of FG honors were lower when Shelf threshold was implemented (OR 0.17 [95% CI 0.06-0.50]), and increased as students got older (OR 1.14 [95% CI 1.01-1.30]) or on specific subspecialties, such as vascular surgery (OR 7.06 [95% CI 1.21-41.26]). Conclusions: The Shelf is substantially influenced by temporal associations across Terms and timing in relation to other clerkships, such as Internal Medicine. An IHE reflective of a clerkship's specified curriculum may be a more equitable summative assessment of the learning that occurs from the CSC curriculum, with fewer biases or influences external to the CSC. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00047-8.