National trends in distribution of underrepresented minorities within United States general surgery residency programs: A longitudinal panel study.

BACKGROUND: Cultural affinity with a provider improves satisfactoriness of healthcare. We examined 2005-2019 trends in racial/ethnic diversity/inclusion within general surgery residency programs. METHODS: We triangulated 2005-2019 race/ethnicity data from Association of American Medical Colleges surveys of 4th-year medical students, the Electronic Residency Application Service, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-affiliated general surgery residencies. Temporal trends in minority representation were tested for significance. RESULTS: Underrepresented racial/ethnic minorities in medicine (URiMs) increased among graduating MDs from 7.6% in 2005 to 11.8% in 2019 (p < 0.0001), as did their proportion among surgery residency applicants during 2005-2019 (p < 0.0001). However, proportions of URiMs among general surgery residents (≈8.5%), and of programs without URiMs (≈18.8%), stagnated. CONCLUSIONS: Growing URiM proportions among medical school graduates and surgery residency applicants did not improve URiM representation among surgery trainees nor shrink the percentage of programs without URiMs. Deeper research into motivators underlying URiMs' residency program preferences is warranted.

An assessment of provider satisfaction with the use of a standardized visual aid for informed consent for appendectomy in children.

PURPOSE: We previously validated a visual aid for the use in the consent process for an appendectomy showing improved parental satisfaction and understanding. In this study, we evaluated provider satisfaction and perceived value of using the visual aid. METHODS: An IRB approved survey was developed assessing provider experience with use of the visual aid. This was distributed and analyzed via Research Electronic Data Capture (RedCap) Database. RESULTS: We administered 58 surveys (45% response rate). Participants included faculty (n = 2), fellows (n = 1), residents (n = 6), and physician assistants (n = 17). The visual aid was used >10 times by 50% of providers. The most common reason for not using the visual aid was not remembering it was available. Nearly half (40%) did not feel the visual aid added any time. 9/20 (45%) felt it added a small amount of time. Slightly over half of providers (52%) felt using the visual aid significantly increased family ability to give informed consent and made the consenting process easier for both providers and families. CONCLUSION: Using a visual aid in consenting families for appendectomy does not add significant time and subjectively improves the process for providers and increases provider perception of parental understanding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cost effectiveness, Level IV.