The harsh realities of racial inequities related to COVID-19 and civil unrest following police killings of unarmed Black men and women in the United States in 2020 heightened awareness of racial injustices around the world. Racism is deeply embedded in academic medicine, yet the nobility of medicine and nursing has helped health care professionals distance themselves from racism. Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), like many U.S. academic medical centers, affirmed its commitment to racial equity in summer 2020. A Racial Equity Task Force was charged with identifying barriers to achieving racial equity at the medical center and medical school and recommending key actions to rectify long-standing racial inequities. The task force, composed of students, staff, and faculty, produced more than 60 recommendations, and its work brought to light critical areas that need to be addressed in academic medicine broadly. To dismantle structural racism, academic medicine must: (1) confront medicine’s racist past, which has embedded racial inequities in the U.S. health care system; (2) develop and require health care professionals to possess core competencies in the health impacts of structural racism; (3) recognize race as a sociocultural and political construct, and commit to debiologizing its use; (4) invest in benefits and resources for health care workers in lower-paid roles, in which racial and ethnic minorities are often overrepresented; and (5) commit to antiracism at all levels, including changing institutional policies, starting at the executive leadership level with a vision, metrics, and accountability.

No abstract

Objective:To describe the collaborative findings across a broad array of subspecialties in children and adolescents with postconcussion syndrome (PCS) in a pediatric multidisciplinary concussion clinic (MDCC) setting.Design:Retrospective analysis.Setting:Multidisciplinary concussion clinic at a pediatric tertiary-level hospital.Patients:Fifty-seven patients seen in MDCC for evaluation and management of PCS between June 2014 and January 2016.Interventions:Clinical evaluation by neurology, sports medicine, otolaryngology, optometry, ophthalmology, physical therapy, and psychology.Main Outcome Measures:Specialty-specific clinical findings and specific, treatable diagnoses relevant to PCS symptoms.Results:A wide variety of treatable, specialty-specific diagnoses were identified as potential contributing factors to patients' postconcussion symptoms. The most common treatable diagnoses included binocular vision dysfunction (76%), anxiety, (57.7%), depression (44.2%), new or change in refractive error (21.7%), myofascial pain syndrome (19.2%), and benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (17.5%).Conclusions:Patients seen in a MDCC setting receive a high number of treatable diagnoses that are potentially related to patients' PCS symptoms. The MDCC approach may (1) increase access to interventions for PCS-related impairments, such as visual rehabilitation, physical therapy, and psychological counseling; (2) provide patients with coordinated medical care across specialties; and (3) hasten recovery from PCS.

Recent media articles have stirred controversy over anecdotal reports of medical students practising educational pelvic examinations on women under anaesthesia without explicit consent. The understandable public outrage that followed merits a substantive response from the medical community. As medical students, we offer a unique perspective on consent for trainee involvement informed by the transitional stage we occupy between patient and physician. We start by contextualising the role of educational pelvic examinations under anaesthesia (EUAs) within general clinical skill development in medical education. Then we analyse two main barriers to achieving explicit consent for educational pelvic EUAs: ambiguity within professional guidelines on how to operationalize ‘explicit consent’ and divergent patient and physician perspectives on harm which prevent physicians from understanding what a reasonable patient would want to know before a procedure. To overcome these barriers, we advocate for more research on patient perspectives to empower the reasonable patient standard. Next, we call for minimum disclosure standards informed by this research and created in conjunction with students, physicians and patients to improve the informed consent process and relieve medical student moral injury caused by performing ‘unconsented’ educational pelvic exams.

Use of race adjustment in estimating glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) has been challenged given concerns that it may negatively impact the clinical care of Black patients, as it results in Black patients being systematically assigned higher eGFR values than non-Black patients. We conducted a systematic review to assess how well eGFR, with and without race adjustment, estimates measured GFR (mGFR) in Black adults globally. A search across multiple databases for articles published from 1999 to May 2021 that compared eGFR to mGFR and reported outcomes by Black race was performed. We included studies that assessed eGFR using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPICr) creatinine equations. Risk of study bias and applicability were assessed with the QUality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Of 13,167 citations identified, 12 met the data synthesis criteria (unique patient cohorts in which eGFR was compared to mGFR with and without race adjustment). The studies included patients with and without kidney disease from Africa (n = 6), the United States (n = 3), Europe (n = 2), and Brazil (n = 1). Of 11 CKD-EPI equation studies, all assessed bias, 8 assessed accuracy, 6 assessed precision, and 5 assessed correlation/concordance. Of 7 MDRD equation studies, all assessed bias, 6 assessed accuracy, 5 assessed precision, and 3 assessed correlation/concordance. The majority of studies found that removal of race adjustment improved bias, accuracy, and precision of eGFR equations for Black adults. Risk of study bias was often unclear, but applicability concerns were low. Our systematic review supports the need for future studies to be conducted in diverse populations to assess the possibility of alternative approaches for estimating GFR. This study additionally provides systematic-level evidence for the American Society of Nephrology—National Kidney Foundation Task Force efforts to pursue other options for GFR estimation.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract