No abstract

No abstract

An extensive body of literature has documented significant racial and ethnic disparities in health and health care. Cultural competency interventions, including the training of physicians and other health care professionals, have been proposed as a key strategy for helping to reduce these disparities. The continuing medical education (CME) profession can play an important role in addressing this need by improving the quality and assessing the outcomes of multicultural education programs. This article provides an overview of health care policy, legislative, accreditation, and professional initiatives relating to these subjects. The status of CME offerings on cultural competence/disparities is reviewed, with examples provided of available curricular resources and online courses. Critiques of cultural competence training and selected studies of its effectiveness are discussed. The need for the CME profession to become more culturally competent in its development, implementation, and evaluation of education programs is examined. Future challenges and opportunities are described, and a call for leadership and action is issued.

Purpose: Social determinants of health (SDH) are recognized as important factors that affect health and well-being. Medical schools are encouraged to incorporate the teaching of SDH. This study investigated the level of commitment to teaching SDH; learning objectives/ goals regarding student knowledge, skills, and attitudes; location in the curriculum and teaching strategies; and perceived barriers to teaching SDH. Methods: A team from the American Medical Association's Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium developed a 23-item inventory survey to document consortium school SDH curricula. The 32 consortium schools were invited to participate. Results: Twenty-nine (94%) schools responded. Most respondents indicated the teaching of SDH was low priority (10, 34%) or high priority (12, 41%). Identified learning objectives/ goals for student knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding SDH were related to the importance of students developing the ability to identify and address SDH and recognizing SDH as being within the scope of physician practice. Curricular timing and teaching strategies suggested more SDH education opportunities were offered in the first and second undergraduate medical education years. Barriers to integrating SDH in curricula were identified: addressing SDH is outside the realm of physician responsibility, space in curriculum is limited, faculty lack knowledge and skills to teach material, and concepts are not adequately represented on certifying examinations. Conclusion: Despite the influence of SDH on individual and population health, programs do not routinely prioritize SDH education on par with basic or clinical sciences. The multitude of learning objectives and goals related to SDH can be achieved by increasing the priority level of SDH and employing better teaching strategies in all years. The discordance between stated objectives/goals and perceived barriers, as well as identification of the variety of strategies utilized to teach SDH during traditional "preclinical" years, indicates curricular areas in need of attention.