BACKGROUND: Recognizing the unique health needs of sexual and gender minorities (i.e., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning individuals) is critical to providing competent and comprehensive healthcare. OBJECTIVE: To assess resident knowledge of healthcare issues uniquely affecting sexual and gender minorities as well as the role of online case-based didactics to measure and improve knowledge in the diagnosis and treatment of these patients. DESIGN: A multicenter online education intervention from December 2016 to April 2018. PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 833 PGY1-3 residents at 120 internal medicine residency programs in the USA who completed 1018 tests.
INTERVENTIONS:A 1-h online module addressing sexual and gender minority (SGM) health. The test evaluated each resident in four categories: (1) terminology relevant to SGM patients; (2) health disparities and preventive care issues affecting SGM patients; (3) substance use and mental health issues unique to SGM patients; and (4) common sexually transmitted illnesses affecting SGM populations. MAIN MEASURES: Participants completed a pre-test assessing SGM health knowledge. A didactic module reviewing diagnosis and management of these diseases was then completed, followed by a post-test. KEY RESULTS: Among 1018 resident respondents, there was no difference between post-graduate year pre-test performance (PGY-1 52%, PGY-2 50%, PGY-3 51%; p = 0.532) or post-test performance (PGY-1 80%, PGY-2 82%, PGY-3 82%; p = 0.285). Pre-test and post-test performance of an online didactic module was the same across test categories and patient populations for PGY-1 vs. PGY-2 vs. PGY-3. Residents demonstrated an improvement between pre-and post-test knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline knowledge of health issues of sexual and gender minorities, as assessed by pre-test performance, did not change during residency training. An online didactic module introduced trainees to critical issues regarding the care of these vulnerable populations until such curricula are required in training. Health disparities in LGBTQ communities may improve with improved physician training on clinical care of LGBTQ patients and families.
BACKGROUND: This is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of note template design on note quality using a simulated patient encounter and a validated assessment tool. OBJECTIVE: To compare note quality between two different templates using a novel randomized clinical simulation process. DESIGN: A randomized non-blinded controlled trial of a standard note template versus redesigned template. PARTICIPANTS: PGY 1-3 IM residents. INTERVENTIONS: Residents documented the simulated patient encounter using one of two templates. The standard template was modeled after the usual outpatient progress note. The new template placed the assessment and plan section in the beginning, grouped subjective data into the assessment, and deemphasized less useful elements. MAIN MEASURES: Note length; time to note completion; note template evaluation by resident authors; note evaluation by faculty reviewers. KEY RESULTS: 36 residents participated, 19 randomized to standard template, 17 to new. New template generated shorter notes (103 vs 285 lines, p < 0.001) that took the same time to complete (19.8 vs 21.6 min, p = 0.654). Using a 5-point Likert scale, residents considered new notes to have increased visual appeal (4 vs 3, p = 0.05) and less redundancy and clutter (4 vs 3, p = 0.006). Overall template satisfaction was not statistically different. Faculty reviewers rated the standard note more up-to-date (4.3 vs 2.7, p = 0.001), accurate (3.9 vs 2.6, p = 0.003), and useful (4 vs 2.8, p = 0.002), but less organized (3.3 vs 4.5, p < 0.001). Total quality was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: Residents rated the new note template more visually appealing, shorter, and less cluttered. Faculty reviewers rated both note types equivalent in the overall quality but rated new notes inferior in terms of accuracy and usefulness though better organized. This study demonstrates a novel method of a simulated clinical encounter to evaluate note templates before the introduction into practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04333238
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.