Most academic health sciences centers offer faculty leadership development programs (LDPs); however, the outcomes of LDPs are largely unknown. This article describes perspectives from our 12-year experience cultivating a formal faculty LDP within an academic health center and longitudinal outcomes of our LDP. Responding to faculty concerns from University of California San Francisco’s (UCSF) 2001 Faculty Climate Survey, UCSF established the UCSF-Coro Faculty Leadership Collaborative (FLC) in 2005. The FLC focused on building leadership skills using a cohort-based, experiential, interactive and collaborative learning approach. From 2005 to 2012, FLC has conducted training for 136 graduates over 7 cohorts with 97.6% completion rate. FLC faculty participants included 64% women and 13% underrepresented minority (URM). The proportions of graduates attaining leadership positions within UCSF such as deans or department chairs among all, URM, and women URM graduates were 9.6%, 33.3% and 45.5%, respectively. A 2013 online survey assessed 2005–2012 graduates’ perceived impacts from 8 months to 8 years after program completion and showed 91.7% of survey respondents felt the program both increased their understanding of UCSF as an organization and demonstrated the University’s commitment to foster faculty development. Qualitative results indicated that graduates perceived benefits at individual, interpersonal, and organizational levels. Though we did not directly assess impact on faculty recruitment and retention, the findings to date support cohort-based experiential learning in faculty leadership training development.
A series of 169 standardized chest films was analyzed relative to hemodynamic parameters obtained within 2 hr of the roentgenogram in 86 patients with acute myocardial infarction. The films were evaluated for cardiomegaly using the cardiothoracic ratio and the standardized, external left heart dimension. The radiographic appearance of the pulmonary vasculature was divided into levels of increasing severity: normal, pulmonary venous congestion, interstitial pulmonary edema, alveolar pulmonary edema. These were compared with wedge pressure levels of ⪕12, 13-18, 19-25, and >25 mm Hg, respectively. Correlations with the admission films of the 86 patients showed: 1) The appearance of the pulmonary vasculature accurately predicted the patient's wedge pressure on admission in 43% of the cases, overestimated it in 33% and underestimated it in 24%. 2) The presence of cardiomegaly and/or pleural effusion indicated an elevated wedge pressure with a high degree of certainty; however the absence of these signs did not exclude an elevated wedge pressure. 3) In only 62% of the studies was the chest film able to detect or exclude the presence of pulmonary venous hypertension. However, when wedge pressures were elevated to 19-25 mm Hg and over 25 mm Hg, 74% and 100%; respectively of roentgenograms had some evidence of pulmonary venous hypertension. 4) There was a high degree of correlation between the patient's admission physical findings, as evidenced by clinical classification, and the radiologic assessment of pulmonary venous hypertension.
There was no statistical variation in the accuracy of the estimate of wedge pressure in relation to the time elapsed from onset of symptoms of myocardial infarction. However, a therapeutic phase lag was encountered in 21 patients, the chest films remaining abnormal for a period of 1 to 4 days following return of the wedge pressure to normal. A diagnostic phase lag was encountered in 6 patients in whom the chest film did not correlate with elevation of wedge pressure for up to 12 hr. Furthermore, in 17 patients the films were normal in spite of a persistently elevated wedge pressure for 6 to 24 hr.
These studies document the limitations of the chest roentgenogram in predicting the hemodynamic status of patients with acute myocardial infarction.
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.