Publications

BACKGROUND

Introverted individuals comprise up to half of the population, but are often overlooked in a culture that privileges extraversion. This misunderstanding of introversion has downstream effects for introverts in academic medicine, including lower grades on clinical rotations, increased stress, and under-representation in leadership positions.

AIMS

To increase support for and awareness of the unique strengths of introverted individuals at all stages of a career in academic medicine.

DESCRIPTION

This article offers twelve tips, based in the educational, business, and personality literature, to empower introverted students, residents, and faculty members for success in academic medicine. While many of the tips apply broadly, certain tips may be more relevant to those in a particular career stage.

CONCLUSION

Increased understanding of the natural tendencies and strengths of introversion will promote a more inclusive working environment for all personality types in medicine and allow introverts at all levels of training and practice to thrive.

IMPORTANCE

Traumatic injury is a major cause of morbidity for people experiencing homelessness (PEH). However, injury patterns and subsequent hospitalization among PEH have not been studied on a national scale.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether differences in mechanisms of injury exist between PEH and housed trauma patients in North America and whether the lack of housing is associated with increased adjusted odds of hospital admission.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a retrospective observational cohort study of participants in the 2017 to 2018 American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program. Hospitals across the US and Canada were queried. Participants were patients aged 18 years or older presenting to an emergency department after injury. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to November 2022.

EXPOSURES

PEH were identified using the Trauma Quality Improvement Program's alternate home residence variable.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was hospital admission. Subgroup analysis was used to compared PEH with low-income housed patients (defined by Medicaid enrollment).

RESULTS

A total of 1 738 992 patients (mean [SD] age, 53.6 [21.2] years; 712 120 [41.0%] female; 97 910 [5.9%] Hispanic, 227 638 [13.7%] non-Hispanic Black, and 1 157 950 [69.6%] non-Hispanic White) presented to 790 hospitals with trauma, including 12 266 PEH (0.7%) and 1 726 726 housed patients (99.3%). Compared with housed patients, PEH were younger (mean [SD] age, 45.2 [13.6] years vs 53.7 [21.3] years), more often male (10 343 patients [84.3%] vs 1 016 310 patients [58.9%]), and had higher rates of behavioral comorbidity (2884 patients [23.5%] vs 191 425 patients [11.1%]). PEH sustained different injury patterns, including higher proportions of injuries due to assault (4417 patients [36.0%] vs 165 666 patients [9.6%]), pedestrian-strike (1891 patients [15.4%] vs 55 533 patients [3.2%]), and head injury (8041 patients [65.6%] vs 851 823 patients [49.3%]), compared with housed patients. On multivariable analysis, PEH experienced increased adjusted odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.24-1.43) compared with housed patients. The association of lacking housing with hospital admission persisted on subgroup comparison of PEH with low-income housed patients (aOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Injured PEH had significantly greater adjusted odds of hospital admission. These findings suggest that tailored programs for PEH are needed to prevent their injury patterns and facilitate safe discharge after injury.

The role of canines in transmitting antibiotic resistant bacteria to humans in the urban environment is poorly understood. To elucidate this role, we utilized genomic sequencing and phylogenetics to characterize the burden and transmission dynamics of antibiotic resistant (ABR-Ec) cultured from canine and human feces present on urban sidewalks in San Francisco, California. We collected a total of fifty-nine ABR-Ec from human (n=12) and canine (n=47) fecal samples from the Tenderloin and South of Market (SoMa) neighborhoods of San Francisco. We then analyzed phenotypic and genotypic antibiotic resistance (ABR) of the isolates, as well as clonal relationships based on cgMLST and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the core genomes. Using Bayesian inference, we reconstructed the transmission dynamics between humans and canines from multiple local outbreak clusters using the marginal structured coalescent approximation (MASCOT). Overall, we found human and canine samples to carry similar amounts and profiles of ABR genes. Our results provide evidence for multiple transmission events of ABR-Ec between humans and canines. In particular, we found one instance of likely transmission from canines to humans as well as an additional local outbreak cluster consisting of one canine and one human sample. Based on this analysis, it appears that canine feces act as an important reservoir of clinically relevant ABR-Ec within the urban environment. Our findings support that public health measures should continue to emphasize proper canine feces disposal practices, access to public toilets and sidewalk and street cleaning. Antibiotic resistance in is a growing public health concern with global attributable deaths projected to reach millions annually. Current research has focused heavily on clinical routes of antibiotic resistance transmission to design interventions while the role of alternative reservoirs such as domesticated animals remain less well understood. Our results suggest canines are part of the transmission network that disseminates high-risk multidrug resistance in within the urban San Francisco community. As such, this study highlights the need to consider canines, and potentially domesticated animals more broadly, when designing interventions to reduce the prevalence of antibiotic resistance in the community. Additionally, it showcases the utility of genomic epidemiology to reconstruct the pathways by which antimicrobial resistance spreads.

IMPORTANCE

Despite the increasing involvement of advanced practice practitioners (APPs; ie, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) in care delivery across specialties, the work patterns of APPs compared with physicians and how they are integrated into care teams have not been well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize differences between physicians and APPs across specialty types related to days with appointments, visit types seen, and time spent using the electronic health record (EHR).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nationwide, cross-sectional study used EHR data from physicians and APPs (ie, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) at all US institutions that used Epic Systems' EHR between January and May 2021. Data analysis was performed from March 2022 to April 2023.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Appointment scheduling patterns, percentage of new and established and level of evaluation and management (E/M) visits, and EHR use metrics per day and week.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 217 924 clinicians across 389 organizations, including 174 939 physicians and 42 985 APPs. Although primary care physicians were more likely than APPs to have more than 3 days per week with appointments (50 921 physicians [79.5%] vs 17 095 APPs [77.9%]), this trend was reversed for medical (38 645 physicians [64.8%] vs 8124 APPs [74.0%]) and surgical (24 155 physicians [47.1%] vs 5198 APPs [51.7%]) specialties. Medical and surgical specialty physicians saw 6.7 and 7.4 percentage points, respectively, more new patient visits than did their APP counterparts, whereas primary care physicians saw 2.8 percentage points fewer new patient visits than did APPs. Physicians saw a greater percentage of level 4 or 5 visits across all specialties. Medical and surgical physicians spent 34.3 and 45.8 fewer minutes per day, respectively, using the EHR than did APPs in their specialties, whereas primary care physicians spent 17.7 minutes per day more. These differences translated to primary care physicians spending 96.3 minutes more per week using the EHR than APPs, whereas medical and surgical physicians spent 149.9 and 140.7 fewer minutes, respectively, than did their APP counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cross-sectional, national study of clinicians found significant differences in visit and EHR patterns for physicians compared with APPs across specialty types. By underscoring the different current usage of physicians vs APPs across specialty types, this study helps place into context the work and visit patterns of physicians compared with APPs and serves as a foundation for evaluations of clinical outcomes and quality.