Impact of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on retention of Indiana medical students for residency.

BACKGROUND: As medical students consider residency training programs, access to comprehensive training in abortion care and the legal climate influencing abortion care provision are likely to affect their decision process. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine medical students' desire to stay in a state with an abortion ban for residency. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to all medical students at a large allopathic medical school. Anonymous survey questions investigated the likelihood of seeking residency training in states with abortion restrictions and the likelihood of considering obstetrics and gynecology as a specialty. Qualitative responses were also captured. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 1424 students, and 473 responses yielded a 33.2% completion rate; 66.8% of students were less likely to pursue residency training in Indiana following a proposed abortion ban. Moreover, 70.0% of students were less likely to pursue residency in a state with abortion restrictions. Approximately half of respondents (52.2%) were less likely to pursue obstetrics and gynecology as a specialty after proposed abortion restrictions. Qualitative remarks encompassed 6 themes: comprehensive health care access, frustration with the political climate, impact on health care providers, relocation, advocacy, and personal beliefs and ethical considerations. CONCLUSION: Most medical students expressed decreased likelihood of remaining in Indiana or in states with abortion restrictions for residency training. The field of obstetrics and gynecology has been negatively affected, with medical students indicating lower likelihood to pursue obstetrics and gynecology. Regardless of specialty, the physician shortage may be exacerbated in states with abortion restrictions. The overturn of Roe v Wade has the potential for significant effects on medical student plans for residency training location, thereby shaping the future of the physician workforce.

Lack of immune response after mRNA vaccination to SARS-CoV-2 in a solid organ transplant patient.

The recent approval and distribution of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been a major development in the fight against the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The first two vaccines approved in the United States, mRNA-1273, and BNT162b2, are both messenger RNA (mRNA) based and highly effective in immunocompetent persons, but efficacy in patients on immunosuppressants has not been established. Additionally, data suggests these patients are less likely than immunocompetent people to develop neutralizing antibodies after COVID-19 infection. Given the high risk of poor outcomes in organ transplant and immunosuppressed patients, effective vaccination is paramount in this group. We present the first reported case of a solid organ transplant patient who failed to achieve seroconversion after two doses of mRNA vaccine. This case has significant implications about how immunosuppressed patients should be counseled about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and the protection provided. Physicians should remain clinically suspicious for infection with SARS-CoV-2 despite vaccination status in solid organ transplant patients.