Background Because of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, graduate medical education programs adopted virtual interviews (VIs) as the default modality for the 2020 recruitment season. It is unknown whether VIs allowed applicants to effectively evaluate programs, and the best interview format for the future is unclear. Objective To 1 ) assess pulmonary and critical care applicants’ perceived ability to evaluate programs using VIs, 2 ) determine the attitudes of applicants toward the components of VIs, and 3 ) identify applicants’ preferences for the future fellowship interview format. Methods After the National Residency Matching Program medical subspecialty match, an electronic survey was sent to 1,067 applicants to pulmonary and critical care medicine programs asking them to compare their fellowship VI experience with their residency in-person interview (IPI) experience. Results Three hundred six (29%) applicants responded to the survey, and 289 completed it (27%). There were 117 (40%) women and 146 (51%) White individuals. Most respondents believed that VIs hindered their ability to evaluate programs’ culture, faculty–fellow relationships, location, facilities, and their own fit within the program. They believed they were able to evaluate the clinical experience, curriculum, and potential for academic development equally well compared with IPIs. The most helpful elements of VIs were the interview with the program director, meetings with the fellows, and interviews with faculty members. Less helpful elements included conference access, prerecorded program director presentations, virtual hospital and city tours, and video testimonials. One hundred twenty-three respondents (43%) chose VIs with an optional visit as their preferred future interview format, 85 (29%) chose IPIs, 54 (19%) wanted a choice between VIs and IPIs, and 27 (9%) chose VIs only. Conclusion Most pulmonary and critical care medicine applicants preferred future interviews to include both VIs and the option of an in-person visit or interview. This study can assist programs in designing their future interview formats in a trainee-centric fashion.

BackgroundInvasive intensive care unit (ICU) treatments for patients with advanced medical illnesses and poor prognoses may prolong suffering with minimal benefit. Unfortunately, the quality of care planning and communication between clinicians and critically ill patients and their families in these situations are highly variable, frequently leading to overutilization of invasive ICU treatments. Time-limited trials (TLTs) are agreements between the clinicians and the patients and decision makers to use certain medical therapies over defined periods of time and to evaluate whether patients improve or worsen according to predetermined clinical parameters. For patients with advanced medical illnesses receiving aggressive ICU treatments, TLTs can promote effective dialogue, develop consensus in decision making, and set rational boundaries to treatments based on patients’ goals of care.ObjectiveThe aim of this study will be to examine whether a multicomponent quality-improvement strategy that uses protocoled TLTs as the default ICU care-planning approach for critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses will decrease duration and intensity of nonbeneficial ICU care without changing hospital mortality.MethodsThis study will be conducted in medical ICUs of three public teaching hospitals in Los Angeles County. In Aim 1, we will conduct focus groups and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing TLTs among ICU patients with advanced medical illnesses. In Aim 2, we will train clinicians to use protocol-enhanced TLTs as the default communication and care-planning approach in patients with advanced medical illnesses who receive invasive ICU treatments. Eligible patients will be those who the treating ICU physicians consider to be at high risk for nonbeneficial treatments according to guidelines from the Society of Critical Care Medicine. ICU physicians will be trained to use the TLT protocol through a curriculum of didactic lectures, case discussions, and simulations utilizing actors as family members in role-playing scenarios. Family meetings will be scheduled by trained care managers. The improvement strategy will be implemented sequentially in the three participating hospitals, and outcomes will be evaluated using a before-and-after study design. Key process outcomes will include frequency, timing, and content of family meetings. The primary clinical outcome will be ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes will include hospital length of stay, days receiving life-sustaining treatments (eg, mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and renal replacement therapy), number of attempts at cardiopulmonary resuscitation, frequency of invasive ICU procedures, and disposition from hospitalization.ResultsThe study began in August 2017. The implementation of interventions and data collection were completed at two of the three hospitals. As of September 2019, the study was at the postintervention stage at the third hospital. We have completed focus groups with physicians ...

Background: Pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship requires a high degree of medical knowledge and procedural competency. Gaps in fellowship readiness can result in significant trainee anxiety related to starting fellowship training. Objective: To improve fellowship readiness and alleviate anxiety for PCCM-bound trainees by improving confidence in procedural skills and cognitive domains. Methods: Medical educators within the American Thoracic Society developed a national resident boot camp (RBC) to provide an immersive, experiential training program for physicians entering PCCM fellowships. The RBC curriculum is a 2-day course designed to build procedural skills, medical knowledge, and clinical confidence through high-fidelity simulation and active learning methodology. Separate programs for adult and pediatric providers run concurrently to provide unique training objectives targeted to their learners’ needs. Trainee assessments include multiple-choice pre- and post-RBC knowledge tests and confidence assessments, which are scored on a four-point Likert scale, for specific PCCM-related procedural and cognitive skills. Learners also evaluate course material and educator effectiveness, which guide modifications of future RBC programs and provide feedback for individual educators, respectively. Results: The American Thoracic Society RBC was implemented in 2014 and has grown annually to include 132 trainees and more than 100 faculty members. Mean knowledge test scores for participants in the 2019 RBC adult program increased from 55% (±14% SD) on the pretest to 72% (±11% SD; P < 0.001) after RBC completion. Similarly, mean pretest scores for pediatric course attendees increased from 54% (±13% SD) to 62% (±19% SD; P = 0.17). Specific content domains that improved by 10% or more between pre- and posttests included airway management, bronchoscopy, pulmonary function testing, and code management for adult course participants, and airway management, pulmonary function testing, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for pediatric course participants. Trainee confidence also significantly improved across all procedural and cognitive domains for adult trainees and in 10 of 11 domains for pediatric course attendees. Course content for the 2019 RBC was overwhelmingly rated as “on target” for the level of learner, with <4% of respondents indicating any specific session was “much too basic” or “much too advanced.” Conclusion: RBC participation improved PCCM-bound trainee knowledge, procedural familiarity, and confidence. Refinement of the RBC curriculum over the past 7 years has been guided by educator and course evaluations, with the ongoing goal of meeting the evolving educational needs of rising PCCM trainees.

BACKGROUND Invasive intensive care unit (ICU) treatments for patients with advanced medical illnesses and poor prognoses may prolong suffering with minimal benefit. Unfortunately, the quality of care planning and communication between clinicians and critically ill patients and their families in these situations are highly variable, frequently leading to overutilization of invasive ICU treatments. Time-limited trials (TLTs) are agreements between the clinicians and the patients and decision makers to use certain medical therapies over defined periods of time and to evaluate whether patients improve or worsen according to predetermined clinical parameters. For patients with advanced medical illnesses receiving aggressive ICU treatments, TLTs can promote effective dialogue, develop consensus in decision making, and set rational boundaries to treatments based on patients’ goals of care. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study will be to examine whether a multicomponent quality-improvement strategy that uses protocoled TLTs as the default ICU care-planning approach for critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses will decrease duration and intensity of nonbeneficial ICU care without changing hospital mortality. METHODS This study will be conducted in medical ICUs of three public teaching hospitals in Los Angeles County. In Aim 1, we will conduct focus groups and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing TLTs among ICU patients with advanced medical illnesses. In Aim 2, we will train clinicians to use protocol-enhanced TLTs as the default communication and care-planning approach in patients with advanced medical illnesses who receive invasive ICU treatments. Eligible patients will be those who the treating ICU physicians consider to be at high risk for nonbeneficial treatments according to guidelines from the Society of Critical Care Medicine. ICU physicians will be trained to use the TLT protocol through a curriculum of didactic lectures, case discussions, and simulations utilizing actors as family members in role-playing scenarios. Family meetings will be scheduled by trained care managers. The improvement strategy will be implemented sequentially in the three participating hospitals, and outcomes will be evaluated using a before-and-after study design. Key process outcomes will include frequency, timing, and content of family meetings. The primary clinical outcome will be ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes will include hospital length of stay, days receiving life-sustaining treatments (eg, mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and renal replacement therapy), number of attempts at cardiopulmonary resuscitation, frequency of invasive ICU procedures, and disposition from hospitalization. RESULTS The study began in August 2017. The implementation of interventions and data collection were completed at two of the three hospitals. As of September 2019, the study was at the postintervention stage at the third hospital. We have completed focus groups with physicians at each medical center (N=29) and interviews of family members and surrogate decision makers (N=18). The study is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2020, and results are expected to be available in mid-2020. CONCLUSIONS The successful completion of the aims in this proposal may identify a systematic approach to improve communication and shared decision making and to reduce nonbeneficial invasive treatments for ICU patients with advanced medical illnesses. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/16301