Assessing the Educational Landscape of Culturally Responsive Education in Pediatric Critical Care Fellowships.

IF 2.1 Q1 Nursing
Christine Joyce, Cody Gathers, Anireddy Reddy, Adrian D Zurca, Marianne E Nellis, Nonye Acholonu, Angela Czaja, Erika Abramson, Katie R Nielsen, Joy Howell, Monica Koncicki, Donald L Boyer
{"title":"Assessing the Educational Landscape of Culturally Responsive Education in Pediatric Critical Care Fellowships.","authors":"Christine Joyce, Cody Gathers, Anireddy Reddy, Adrian D Zurca, Marianne E Nellis, Nonye Acholonu, Angela Czaja, Erika Abramson, Katie R Nielsen, Joy Howell, Monica Koncicki, Donald L Boyer","doi":"10.1542/hpeds.2024-008255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Health disparities persist among marginalized racial, ethnic, and lower socioeconomic status groups, extending to pediatric intensive care units. Complex interactions between structural forces and provider biases influence patients' risk for critical illness, access, timing, and quality of care. An understanding of how these social influencers of health directly impact health outcomes should be necessary components of pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship. Currently, no uniform guidelines exist that provide training in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in PCCM. We therefore sought to describe the current state of DEI education in PCCM fellowship programs from the program director (PD) perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A national survey was conducted among Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited PCCM fellowship PDs to evaluate the state of DEI education. The survey, developed collaboratively and iteratively, encompassed program details, DEI teaching modalities, barriers, and PD perspectives. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 76 PDs surveyed, 47 responded (62% response rate). Although 57% of PDs recognized DEI education as a divisional priority, only 34% had a formal DEI curriculum. Barriers to DEI education included lack of trained faculty, attending time, and engagement. Notably, PDs expressed concerns about faculty competence in delivering DEI education and the scarcity of underrepresented in medicine physicians across trainees and faculty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings reveal significant gaps in DEI education within PCCM fellowship programs. Despite recognition of DEI importance, formalized curricula are lacking. The study underscores the necessity for tailored educational interventions and strategies to optimize care.</p>","PeriodicalId":38180,"journal":{"name":"Hospital pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"e440-e445"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2024-008255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Health disparities persist among marginalized racial, ethnic, and lower socioeconomic status groups, extending to pediatric intensive care units. Complex interactions between structural forces and provider biases influence patients' risk for critical illness, access, timing, and quality of care. An understanding of how these social influencers of health directly impact health outcomes should be necessary components of pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship. Currently, no uniform guidelines exist that provide training in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in PCCM. We therefore sought to describe the current state of DEI education in PCCM fellowship programs from the program director (PD) perspective.

Methods: A national survey was conducted among Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited PCCM fellowship PDs to evaluate the state of DEI education. The survey, developed collaboratively and iteratively, encompassed program details, DEI teaching modalities, barriers, and PD perspectives. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics.

Results: Of the 76 PDs surveyed, 47 responded (62% response rate). Although 57% of PDs recognized DEI education as a divisional priority, only 34% had a formal DEI curriculum. Barriers to DEI education included lack of trained faculty, attending time, and engagement. Notably, PDs expressed concerns about faculty competence in delivering DEI education and the scarcity of underrepresented in medicine physicians across trainees and faculty.

Conclusions: The findings reveal significant gaps in DEI education within PCCM fellowship programs. Despite recognition of DEI importance, formalized curricula are lacking. The study underscores the necessity for tailored educational interventions and strategies to optimize care.

评估儿童重症监护奖学金中文化响应教育的教育景观。
目的:在被边缘化的种族、民族和社会经济地位较低的群体中,健康差距持续存在,并延伸到儿科重症监护病房。结构力量和提供者偏见之间复杂的相互作用影响患者患危重疾病的风险、可及性、时间和护理质量。了解这些健康的社会影响因素如何直接影响健康结果应该是儿科重症监护医学(PCCM)奖学金的必要组成部分。目前,在PCCM中没有统一的指导方针提供多样性、公平性和包容性(DEI)方面的培训。因此,我们试图从项目总监(PD)的角度来描述PCCM奖学金项目中DEI教育的现状。方法:在全国范围内对研究生医学教育认证委员会认可的PCCM奖学金博士进行调查,以评估DEI教育的现状。该调查是由合作和迭代开发的,包括项目细节、DEI教学模式、障碍和PD观点。采用描述性统计进行统计分析。结果:在接受调查的76名pd中,有47名回复(62%的回复率)。虽然57%的pd认为DEI教育是该地区的优先事项,但只有34%的pd拥有正式的DEI课程。DEI教育的障碍包括缺乏训练有素的教师、参加时间和参与度。值得注意的是,博士们表达了对教师提供DEI教育的能力的担忧,以及在实习生和教师中缺乏代表性的医学医生。结论:研究结果揭示了PCCM奖学金项目中DEI教育的显著差距。尽管承认DEI的重要性,但缺乏正式的课程。该研究强调了定制教育干预和策略以优化护理的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hospital pediatrics
Hospital pediatrics Nursing-Pediatrics
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
204
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信