Initial evidence of reliability and validity of an implicit association test assessing attitudes toward individuals who use substances.

Background: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are stigmatized conditions, with individual biases driving poor health outcomes. There are surprisingly few validated measures of bias or stigma toward individuals who use substances. Bias can be classified as explicit (self-report) or implicit (behaviorally based).Objectives: The goal of the present study was to establish preliminary indices of reliability and validity of an implicit association test (IAT) designed to measure implicit bias toward individuals who use substances.Methods: A large United States-based, crowd-sourced sample (n = 394, 51.5% male, 45.4% female, 2.5% nonbinary) completed the IAT and a small battery of survey instruments that assessed social distance to mental illness (including heroin use), attitude toward and perceived controllability of injection drug use, perception of public stigma, and social desirability.Results: Nearly all (92%; n = 363) scores on the IAT indicated greater negative than positive attitudes toward those who use substances. Spearman-Brown corrected split-half reliability on the IAT scores was excellent, r = .953. Controlling for social desirability, IAT scores positively correlated with all included measures pertaining to substance use as well as social distance for heroin and schizophrenia (but not diabetes). A principal component analysis resulted in two interpretable components representing disapproval (perceived controllability and negative attitudes) and perceived stigma (social stigma and social distance). Scores on the IAT positively correlated to scores on both components, again, controlling for social desirability.Conclusion: These results provide compelling preliminary evidence of validity of an IAT designed to measure bias toward individuals who use substances.

Standardizing postoperative handoffs using the evidence-based IPASS framework through a multidisciplinary initiative improves handoff communication for neurosurgical patients in the neuro-intensive care unit.

Errors in communication are a major source of preventable medical errors. Neurosurgical patients frequently present to the neuro-intensive care unit (NICU) postoperatively, where handoffs occur to coordinate care within a large multidisciplinary team. A multidisciplinary working group at our institution started an initiative to improve postoperative neurosurgical handoffs using validated quality improvement methodology. Baseline handoff practices were evaluated through staff surveys and serial observations. A formalized handoff protocol was implemented using the evidence based IPASS format (Illness severity, Patient summary, Action list, Situational awareness and contingency planning, Synthesis by receiver). Cycles of objective observations and surveys were employed to track practice improvements and guide iterative process changes over one year. Surveys demonstrated improved perceptions of handoffs as organized (17.1% vs 69.7%, p < 0.001), efficient (27.0% vs. 72.7%, p < 0.001), comprehensive (17.1% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001), and safe (18.0% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001), noting improved teamwork (31.5% vs. 69.7%, p < 0.001). Direct observations demonstrated improved communication of airway concerns (47.1% observed vs. 92.3% observed, p < 0.001), hemodynamic concerns (70.6% vs. 97.1%, p = 0.001), intraoperative events (52.9% vs. 100%, p < 0.001), neurological examination (76.5% vs. 100%, p < 0.001), vital sign goals (70.6% vs. 100%, p < 0.001), and required postoperative studies (76.5% vs. 100%, p < 0.001). Receiving teams demonstrating improved rates of summarization (47.1% vs. 94.2%, p = 0.005) and asking questions (76.5% vs 98.1%, p = 0.004). The mean handoff time during long-term follow-up was 4.4 min (95% confidence interval = 3.9-5.0 min). Standardization of handoff practices yields improvements in communication practices for postoperative neurosurgical patients.

To Tweet or Not to Tweet, That Is the Question.

In the past 20 years, a variety of social media platforms have significantly changed how we interact, communicate, learn, and engage. Social media use by physicians and physicians in training has expanded dramatically and evolved in recent years. Here, we focus on the use of Twitter by medical professionals (#medtwitter) and analyze Twitter's role as a new tool for learning, teaching, networking, professional development, mentorship/sponsorship, and advocacy within medicine. We discuss principles of adult learning theory to support the effectiveness of the use of Twitter as an educational tool, and share best practice pearls as well.