Establishing Equity in Medical Education - Supporting Clinical Trainees with Disabilities

Transforming medical education: Implementing 'disruptors' to break the cycle of ableism

@meekslisa and @jbullockruns in @MedEd_Journal highlight the struggles of disabled students and call for strategic disruptions to dismantle ableism and foster inclusion in #HPE. #DocsWithDisabilities #MedTwitter #MedEd

Perception of Tunisian Medical Students with Chronic Conditions: Pilot Study

Background

Medical studies are hard to manage especially for students with specific needs. These students warrant some adaptations in studies and trainings in order to achieve learning goals. Studies showed they face structural and cultural barriers and stigma. Current efforts aim to encourage integration of these persons in order to increase diversity.

Objective

This study aimed to assess perception of Tunisian medical students with specific needs.

Method

Cross-sectional study through online questionnaire including learners affiliated to the Faculty of Medicine of Tunis (students, interns, and residents) who consider they have specific needs. This questionnaire was elaborated by authors and explored barriers faced by participants, needed help, and suggested solutions. Study respected consent and confidentiality.

Results

This study included 40 participants. Most of them (n = 32) were post-graduate (interns and residents). The most reported condition was mental disability (n = 14). Main challenges faced by participants were work time schedule, unhealthy lifestyle, and negative attitudes from peers and supervisors, and 19 felt victim of stigma. Reported specific needs were adapting work schedule and psychological support from peers, from supervisors, or from mental health professionals. Almost half of the participants did never disclose their difficulties (n = 21). Suggested solutions involved to have a counseling center within the faculty. Only 8 participants knew there was a new unit helping students with specific needs in FMT.

Conclusions

Despite efforts of the university, medical learners with chronic conditions still face many structural and cultural barriers to inclusion. Most participants suggested to have more psychological support from faculty.

Bridges of perspectives: representation of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury in editorial boards and peer review

BACKGROUND

Diversity among editorial boards and in the peer review process maximizes the likelihood that the dissemination of reported results is both relevant and respectful to readers and end users. Past studies have examined diversity among editorial board members and reviewers for factors such as gender, geographic location, and race, but limited research has explored the representation of people with disabilities. Here, we sought to understand the landscape of inclusivity of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury specifically in journals publishing papers (2012-2022) on their quality of life.

METHODS

An open and closed 12-question adaptive survey was disseminated to 31 journal editors over a one-month period beginning December 2022.

RESULTS

We received 10 fully completed and 5 partially completed survey responses (response rate 48%). Notwithstanding the small sample, over 50% (8/15) of respondents indicated that their journal review practices involve people with lived experience of spinal cord injury, signaling positive even if incomplete inclusivity practices. The most notable reported barriers to achieving this goal related to identifying and recruiting people with lived experience to serve in the review and editorial process.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study we found positive but incomplete trends toward inclusivity in journal practices involving people with lived experience of spinal cord injury. We recommend, therefore, that explicit and genuine efforts are directed toward recruitment through community-based channels. To improve representation even further, we suggest that editors and reviewers be offered the opportunity to self-identify as living with a disability without discrimination or bias.

Disability, program access, empathy and burnout in US medical students: A national study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to investigate whether self-disclosed disability and self-reported program access are associated with measures of empathy and burnout in a national sample of US medical students.

METHODS

The authors obtained data from students who responded to the Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) Year 2 Questionnaire (Y2Q) in 2019 and 2020. Data included demographic characteristics, personal variables, learning environment indicators, measures of burnout (Oldenburg Burnout Inventory for Medical Students), empathy (Interpersonal Reactivity Index) and disability-related questions, including self-reported disability, disability category and program access. Associations between disability status, program access, empathy and burnout were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models accounting for YQ2 demographic, personal-related and learning environment measures.

RESULTS

Overall, 23 898 (54.2%) provided disability data and were included. Of those, 2438 (10.2%) self-reported a disability. Most medical students with disabilities (SWD) self-reported having program access through accommodations (1215 [49.8%]) or that accommodations were not required for access (824 [33.8%]). Multivariable models identified that compared with students without disabilities, SWD with and without program access presented higher odds of high exhaustion (1.50 [95% CI, 1.34-1.69] and 2.59 [95% CI, 1.93-3.49], respectively) and lower odds of low empathy (0.75 [95% CI, 0.67-.85] and 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.90], respectively). In contrast, multivariable models for disengagement identified that SWD reporting lack of program access presented higher odds of high disengagement compared to students without disabilities (1.43 [95% CI, 1.09-1.87], whereas SWD with program access did not (1.09 [95% CI, 0.97-1.22]).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite higher odds of high exhaustion, SWD were less likely to present low empathy regardless of program access, and SWD with program access did not differ from students without disabilities in terms of disengagement. These findings add to our understanding of the characteristics and experiences of SWD including their contributions as empathic future physicians.

Barriers to Disclosure of Disability and Request for Accommodations Among First-Year Resident Physicians in the US

Importance

Ensuring access to accommodations is critical for resident physicians and their patients. Studies show that a large proportion of medical trainees with disabilities do not request needed accommodations; however, drivers of nonrequests are unknown.

Objective

To assess the frequency of accommodation requests among first-year resident physicians (ie, interns) with disabilities and to identify possible drivers of nonrequest for needed accommodations.

Design, Setting, and Participants

As part of the Intern Health Study, a longitudinal cohort study of first-year resident physicians, residents at 86 surgical and nonsurgical residency programs in 64 US institutions provided demographic and training characteristics 2 months prior to matriculation (April-May 2021). At the end of their intern year (June 2022), participants completed a new survey with questions about disability-related information, including disability status, disability type, whether they received accommodations, and if not, reasons for nonaccommodation. Poststratification and attrition weights were used to estimate the frequency of accommodation requests and reasons for not requesting accommodations. Interns reporting at least 1 disability were included in the analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prevalence of reported disabilities, residency specialties distribution, frequency of accommodation requests, and reasons for nonaccommodation among resident physicians with disabilities.

Results

Among the 1486 resident physicians who completed the baseline survey, 799 (53.8%) replied to the disability questions. Of those, 94 interns (11.8%; weighted number, 173 [11.9%]) reported at least 1 disability and were included in the present study (weighted numbers, 91 [52.6%] men, 82 [47.4%] women, mean [SD] age, 28.6 [3.0] years). Among interns with reported disability and need for accommodations (83 of 173 [48.0%]), more than half (42 [50.6%]) did not request them. The most frequently reported reasons for not requesting needed accommodations were fear of stigma or bias (25 [59.5%]), lack of a clear institutional process for requesting accommodations (10 [23.8%]), and lack of documentation (5 [11.9%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Program directors should investigate cultural and structural factors within their programs that contribute to an environment where residents do not feel safe or supported in disclosing disability and requesting accommodation and review their disability policies for clarity.

Disability inclusion in medical education: Towards a quality improvement approach

THE ISSUE

The shift to a more diverse workforce that includes physicians with disabilities has gained considerable international traction. Indeed, disability inclusion is experiencing a renaissance in medical education. However, the philosophy of disability inclusion must be adjusted from one where disabled trainees are viewed as problematic and having to 'overcome' disability to one where institutions anticipate and welcome disabled trainees as a normative part of a diverse community.

OBSERVATIONS

Most trainees with disabilities will enter an unregulated, uninformed system leaving them vulnerable to under-accommodation, systems barriers and lack of informed support. Further, the perception of the super human good doctor creates disincentives for candidates to disclose their disability, creating structural barriers that the system needs to address. A less often discussed contributor to health care inequities is the inadequate training of health professional educators on disability rights and disability competencies. Indeed, the lack of education, coupled with minimal exposure to disability outside of the hierarchical patient-provider relationship, perpetuates to stereotypes and biases that impact clinical care.

APPROACH

Disability inclusion has not been reviewed through the lens of quality improvement. To close this gap, we examine the state of the science through the lens of disability inclusion and offer considerations for a quality improvement approach in medical education that addresses the global revised trilogy of World Federation for Medical Education standards of quality improvement at all three levels of education, training and practice.

CONCLUSION

We propose a vision of systems-based disability-inclusive, accessible and equitable medical education using 9 of Deming's 14 points as applicable to medical education.

Deconstructing Ableism in Health Care Settings Through Case-Based Learning

INTRODUCTION

Patients with disabilities face health disparities, and providers with disabilities confront professional roadblocks and institutional bias. Yet their experiences are often excluded from medical education, and few case studies address culturally humble care for those with disabilities.

METHODS

We created two 1-hour case-based modules on disability and ableism from patient and provider perspectives. Modules were piloted in June 2020 and presented at two conferences in April 2021. Modules included a prereading, introductory disability presentation, and facilitated case discussions. Sessions were evaluated with pre- and/or postsession surveys. Modules were rated on 5-point Likert scales for educational value, professional growth contribution, and interactive/engaging design.

RESULTS

Participants rated the patient and provider modules 4.5, 4.4, and 4.4 and 4.5, 4.4, and 4.5 for the three categories, respectively. Participants noted that the sessions were insightful and validating and improved their understanding of ableism and the importance of disability curricula. There were significant improvements in participants' perceptions of ability to discuss ableism's impacts, recognize barriers, identify resource/support gaps for trainees, and advocate. A total of 171 participants completed our modules, with survey response rates of 38% (60 out of 160) and 48% (77 out of 160) for one conference and a postsurvey response rate of 64% (seven out of 11) for the second.

DISCUSSION

Designed for health care trainees, providers, administration, and staff, our sessions introduced concepts of ableism, accommodation, and health care barriers. Our results suggest the modules can contribute to professional growth, understandings of ableism, and participants' disability advocacy tool kit.

Impact of USMLE Step-1 accommodation denial on US medical schools: A national survey

INTRODUCTION

In 2019, 4.6% of US-MD students self-identified as students with disabilities (SWD); many of these students will require accommodations on the USMLE Step-1 examination. Given the high-stakes nature of Step-1 for medical school advancement and residency match, SWD denied accommodations on Step-1 face considerable consequences. To date no study has investigated the rate of accommodation denial and its impact on medical school operations.

METHODS

To investigate the rate of accommodation denial and evaluate whether Step-1 accommodation denial impacts medical school operations, a 10-question survey was sent to Student Affairs Deans and disability resource professionals at all fully-accredited US-MD granting programs. Two open-ended questions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-three of the 141 schools responded (52%). In the 2018-2019 academic year, 276 students from 73 schools applied for Step-1 accommodations. Of these, 144 (52%) were denied. Of those denied, 74/144 (51%) were delayed entry into the next phase of curriculum and 110/144 (76%) took the Step-1 exam unaccommodated. Of the 110 who took Step-1 without accommodations, 35/110 (32%) failed the exam, and 4/110 (3%) withdrew or were dismissed following exam failure. Schools reported varied investments of time and financial support for students denied accommodations, with most schools investing less than 20 hours (67%) and less than $1,000.00 (69%). Open-responses revealed details regarding the impact of denial on schools and students including frustration with process; financial and human resources allocation; delay in student progression; lack of resourcing and expertise; and emotional and financial burdens on students.

DISCUSSION

Step-1 accommodation denial has non-trivial financial, operational, and career impacts on medical schools and students alike. The cause of accommodation denial in this population requires further exploration.

Institutional Accountability for Students With Disabilities: A Call for Liaison Committee on Medical Education Action

Medical educators and leaders have called for greater diversity among the physician workforce, including those with disabilities. However, many students with disabilities are precluded from entering and completing medical training due to historically restrictive technical standards and poor internal practices to protect student privacy. This limits the possibilities for growing this part of the workforce and making progress toward the ultimate goal of having a physician workforce that better represents the patients it serves. To achieve diversity among the physician workforce, medical education must create environments that allow students with disabilities to apply to, flourish in, and feel well supported in medical school. Recent additions to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements have helped to catalyze work in the area of disability inclusion by incorporating disability-focused mandates into graduate medical education accreditation standards. However, similar mandates for undergraduate medical education have not yet materialized. In this article, the authors call for the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) to elevate disability as a valued part of medical school diversity in its accreditation standards and to include protections for disabled students. The authors propose that the LCME can take 5 actions to promote institutional accountability toward students with disabilities: (1) define disability as diversity, (2) mandate disability support, (3) protect from conflicts of interest, (4) protect privacy, and (5) verify schools' technical standards comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. By adopting these recommendations, the LCME would send the powerful message that students with disabilities bring welcome expertise and value to the medical community.

Structural Barriers to Student Disability Disclosure in US-Allopathic Medical Schools

INTRODUCTION

Leaders in medical education have expressed a commitment to increase medical student diversity, including those with disabilities. Despite this commitment there exists a large gap in the number of medical students self-reporting disability in anonymous demographic surveys and those willing to disclose and request accommodations at a school level. Structural elements for disclosing and requesting disability accommodations have been identified as a main barrier for students with disabilities in medical education, yet school-level practices for student disclosure at US-MD programs have not been studied.

METHODS

In August 2020, a survey seeking to ascertain institutional disability disclosure structure was sent to student affairs deans at LCME fully accredited medical schools. Survey responses were coded according to their alignment with considerations from the AAMC report on disability and analyzed for any associations with the AAMC Organizational Characteristics Database and class size.

RESULTS

Disability disclosure structures were collected for 98 of 141 eligible schools (70% response rate). Structures for disability disclosure varied among the 98 respondent schools. Sixty-four (65%) programs maintained a disability disclosure structure in alignment with AAMC considerations; 34 (35%) did not. No statistically significant relationships were identified between disability disclosure structures and AAMC organizational characteristics or class size.

DISCUSSION

Thirty-five percent of LCME fully accredited MD program respondents continue to employ structures of disability disclosure that do not align with the considerations offered in the AAMC report. This structural non-alignment has been identified as a major barrier for medical students to accessing accommodations and may disincentivize disability disclosure. Meeting the stated calls for diversity will require schools to consider structural barriers that marginalize students with disabilities and make appropriate adjustments to their services to improve access.