Transforming Medical Education: Trust, Time, Teams & Technology

28 11 2011

This past Thanksgiving, I was able to reflect on the always jam-packed and inspiring Association of American Medical Colleges 2011 Meeting that took place earlier this month in Denver.  The theme of the meeting was transformation.  It was certainly an interesting theme with the undertones of economic recession and the GME funding crisis- and that was before the failure of the Supercommittee to reach a resolution.  So, how does medical education need to transform?  In more ways than one, it turns out.  So here are just 4 that were the recurring themes of the meeting and being a fan of alliteration, they all begin with “T”.

  • Trust – it was clear that we need to restore the Americans people trust in physicians and in the medical education process.  While students enter medicine to make a difference, something that they see in their journey to becoming a physician makes them jaded and they sometimes lose sight of their initial intention. Is it debt, burnout, role models…Or likely some combination of the 3? It does not matter, because we have to restore their faith in teaching– yes teaching.  Teaching is the heart and soul of our medical education and it is sometimes the easiest to lose in an academic health center focused on NIH dollars or US news world report rankings.  In addition to teaching our students, it is time to teach another constituency, our patients and Congress about the critical need for medical education.   And in fact, advocacy is something we need to be teaching our own trainees so they can engage in the dialogue regarding the future of healthcare.
  • Time- perhaps the most radical proposal advanced was by Victor Fuchs who suggested that we radically redesign medical school to have medical students specialize 2 years after medical school and enter specific pathways like they do in many other countries and in other fields.  I’m all for shortening dwell time for our medical trainees, but I am not so sure that young people are ready to make a serious commitment about what they want to do at such an early age.  There has to be a middle ground since at the same time, one of the most well attended sessions was “who cares about the 4th year of medical school?” which included many insightful comments about the need for reflection and consolidation of core skills.  So, clearly not all time is easily tossed to the waste side.
  • Teams- given the projected shortage of over 90,000 physicians by 2020, it is important to reorganize care into teams.  While there is a lot of controversy about what to call nurses who have PhDs, that was not the focus of the meeting. It was about how can you encourage everyone to practice to their highest level of certification.  Team based competences have actually been developed by several groups and have been advanced by many schools with inter professional learning.  One difficulty we face at home is that we don’t have allied health professions, but we are brainstorming how to involve actual nurses and pharmacists in training medical students.
  • Technology -there was a lot of discussion about technology to boost medical education.  There was even a technology in medical education abstract session moderated by @motherinmedicine and including podcasts, iPads, and social media in medicine.  Perhaps the most interesting speaker was Chuck Friedman at the University of Michigan who is the former technology czar of the US and eloquently highlighted the need for moving medical education from wrote memorization to a distributed knowledge where the most important information future physicians will need to know is not what the information is off the top of their head BUT how to access information.  He went so far to say testing would move to “unassisted testing” followed by “cloud-supported testing” which would then merge into a pass or fail based on performance on both.  I know all of us who certified or recertified recently would welcome assistance from the cloud- it is after all the closest approximation to real medicine.  However, my hands down favorite moment of this session was when someone astutely asked what about these physicians when the power goes out or when the computer system fries.  His response was simple and so spot on… “Dont get me started on the state of IT in our teaching hospitals”.
So, while we just celebrated a holiday and accompanying ritual to give thanks, it is now time for medical educators to transcend the traditional status quo and instead test novel techniques to transform medical training — not only to restore public trust but so we can also train the trainees who will treat us in the future.
–Vineet Arora MD




Differences Between Real & Fake Patients

9 10 2011

Each morning this week, I am rounding on a busy inpatient general medicine service in an academic hospital seeing real patients.  Each night this week, I am also studying for the internal medicine recertification exam where I am doing countless MKSAP questions which present the diagnostic and management conundrums of “fake patients.”   While there are a variety of things I could say about the process, one thing is clear- the real patients don’t ever come as neatly wrapped and easy to figure out as the pithy and succinct questions based on fake patients in the prep questions!   Perhaps the most distinct differences are that real patients suffer from real problems that plague real people…and that is of course why one of the most important lessons for our medical students is that being a good doctor is more than just how well you do on a standardized exam.  It is knowing how to mobilize a team and resources to tend to all of these problems in the same patient.   Here are just a few ways in which the real patients we see differ from testable “patients.”

  • Social problems trump medical problems – Many of the patients we see suffer from poor health literacy, lack of insurance, access to safe housing, affordable healthy food, and access to healthcare outside of the hospital that prevents optimal care and treatment of their medical conditions.  Understanding how to bring up and address these problems is equally important to design a customized care plan for a patient that will ensure their most optimal recovery and health outside of the hospital.
  • Caregiver support- Many older patients who are chronically ill are cared for by family members who suffer a lot of stress.  This stress manifests in different ways and sometimes you see that sigh of relief when they come to the hospital since they are in need of as much care and support as their family member.  Arranging home services and providing and ensuring caregiver support is a key part of hospital care these days.
  • Insurance compatibility – Most patients require services that go beyond hospital discharge, such as home IV antibiotics or short-term rehabilitation stays after hospitalization to recover.  In addition, patients often require close follow up after hospitalization. Unfortunately, arranging such things for patients who are uninsured or underinsured is increasingly difficult.  Perhaps this is one thing that we can hope to change with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act- lets at least hope so.  But for now, it’s sometimes a guessing game how to piece together the most logical plan that will also be optimally covered.
  • Medical necessity – These days, patients can’t stay in the hospital to “recover” unless it meets strict criteria for inpatient admission.  This process is audited by private contractors so hospitals are required to follow strict guidelines or face harsh penalties from Medicare.  The challenge is that for a variety of social issues documented above, patients may not be ready to go home (caregiver not ready, patient lacks understanding regarding illness, etc.) but they have to go home or be faced with footing the bill for their stay.   Given that rock and a hard place, it’s a difficult position for any doctor to be in.

Because medicine does change and evolve very quickly, we refresh our medical knowledge every 10 years by testing our clinical acumen through ‘caring’ for fake patients on a written exam.  But, a written exam can only go so far…Given the sea changes occurring on a daily basis in our healthcare delivery system, it is equally important to stay up-to-date on systems-level changes that influence how we can actually provide care for real patients.  After all, both are necessary for good doctoring.

Vineet Arora, MD





Twitter to Tenure: 7 ways social media advances my career

2 05 2011

As part of our SGIM Social Media Workshop “From Twitter to Tenure” our workshop lineup of ’twitterati’ will be posting each day this week about how social media affected their career.   So yesterday was @AlexSmithMD on GeriPal.   Here is the schedule for the week:  Monday – me (@FutureDocs) here on FuturedocsTuesday – Bob Centor (@medrants) on DB’s Medical RantsWednesday – Kathy Chretien (@MotherinMed) on Mother’s in MedicineThursday – Eric Widera (@ewidera) on GeriPal (and hope to see you in Phoenix for our workshop!)

For the Twitter to Tenure workshop at this year’s Society of General Internal Medicine Meeting, I was asked to think about how social media enhanced my career.  This may sound ridiculous at first- after all, social media is a big waste of time right? Wrong as some of you have discovered.  Social media has opened doors for me by connecting me to a variety of people I would not have met.  Here is just a brief list of the ways social media has impacted my academic career.

  • Media interviews – I was interviewed by Dr Pauline Chen through the New York Times who located me through – you guessed it Twitter!  She actually approached me for the interview by direct messaging me through Twitter.  She was following me and noticed my interests in handoffs on my Google profile which is linked to my Twitter account.  She was also very encouraging when I started the blog which was exciting!
  • Workshop presentations- I presented a workshop on social media in medical education (#SMIME as we like to call it), at 2 major medical meetings with 3 others (including @MotherInMed who encouraged me to start a blog and also is my copresenter at SGIM).  The idea was borne on Twitter…and the first time I actually met one of the workshop presenters (who I knew on Twitter) was at the workshop.
  • Acquired new skills  – My workshop co-presenter who I only knew through Twitter ended up being Carrie Saarinen, an instructional technologist (a very cool job and every school needs one!).  She is an amazing resource and taught me how to do a wiki.  After my period of ‘lurking’, I started my own ‘course’ wiki  dedicated to helping students do research and scholarly work which we are launching in a week.
  • Lecture invitations – Several of my lecture invitations come through social media.  Most notably, I was invited to speak for an AMSA webinar on handoffs and also speak to the Committee of Interns and Residents on teaching trainees about cost conscious medicine.  Both invitations started with a reference to finding me through Twitter or the blog.
  • Committee invitations – I am now on the SGIM communications task force as a result of my interest in social media.  Our most recent effort was a piece about ‘tweeting the meeting’ with @medrants and an older piece focused on the top Twitter Myths and Tips.
  • Grant opportunities – I recently submitted a grant with an organization that I learned of on Twitter – Initially, I had contacted Neel Shah from Costs of Care asking him if they had a curriculum on healthcare costs.  They did not, but were interested in writing a grant to develop a curriculum so they brought my team on board and we submitted together (fingers crossed).
  • Dissemination - One of the defining features of scholarship (the currency of promotion in academic medical centers) is that it has to be shared.   Well, social media is one of the most powerful ways to share information.   In a recent example, we entered a social media contest media video contest on the media sharing site Slideshare.  Using social media, we were able to obtain the most number of ‘shares’ on Facebook on Twitter which led to the most number of views and ultimately won ‘Best Professional Video.’  To date, this video, has received over 13,000 views, which I was able to highlight as a form of ‘dissemination’ in a recent meeting with our Chairman about medical education scholarship.    While digital scholarship is still under investigation with vocal critics and enthusiastic proponents debating the value of digital scholarship in academia, digital scholarship does appear to have a place for spreading nontraditional media that cannot be shared via peer review.

Part of being a good citizen on social media is giving back.  I try to give back when I can through helping anyone who contacts me for something specific – so I have read personal statements, reviewed websites, and offered input to others who are interested in my perspective on their work.  I can’t always keep up since I have a day job and alas, this is an extracurricular activity.  The good news is a tweet is only 140 characters  – so like the blue bird, I can keep it short but sweet.

–Vineet Arora, MD








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,959 other followers