Filling the void in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) leadership training

Purpose Leadership training refers to the process of helping individuals develop skills to successfully perform in leadership positions. Existing leadership programs have several drawbacks, including the paucity of leadership programs designed for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) individuals in health care. The authors addressed this gap by creating and hosting Q-Forward (formerly Q-Med), the first conference focused specifically on leadership development for LGBTQ+ health trainees. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors explain how a conference focused on leadership development for LGBTQ+ health trainees can have benefits for trainees, patients and the health-care system. The authors also report the conference proceedings, including planning, participants, guiding principles and programming. Originality/value This conference was the first conference for LGBTQ+ health trainees focused specifically on leadership training. The authors believe that the conference was unique, and that such training represents an essential step toward long-term improvements in the health of LGBTQ+ people and other populations. </jats:sec

Seeking Inclusion Excellence: Understanding Racial Microaggressions as Experienced by Underrepresented Medical and Nursing Students

PurposeTo describe how racial microaggressions may affect optimal learning for under-represented health professions students.MethodThe authors conducted focus groups and individual interviews from November 2017 to June 2018 with 37 students at University of California, Davis and Yale University who self-identified as underrepresented in medicine or nursing. Questions explored incidence, response to, and effects of racial microaggressions, as well as students' suggestions for change. Data were organized and coded, then thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes.ResultsThe data showed consistent examples of microaggressions across both health professions and schools, with peers, faculty, preceptors, and structural elements of the curricula all contributing to microaggressive behavior. The 3 major themes were: students felt devalued by microaggressions; students identified how microaggressions affected their learning, academic performance, and personal wellness; and students had suggestions for promoting inclusion.ConclusionsThe data indicated that students perceived that their daily experiences were affected by racial microaggressions. Participants reported strong emotions while experiencing racial microaggressions including feeling stressed, frustrated, and angered by these interactions. Further, students believed microaggressions negatively affected their learning, academic performance, and overall well-being. This study shows the need for leadership and faculty of health professions schools to implement policies, practices, and instructional strategies that support and leverage diversity so that innovative problem-solving can emerge to better serve underserved communities and reduce health disparities

Perspectives of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Diversity Standards

Background: To increase diversity and inclusion in graduate medical education, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) issued a revision to their Common Program Requirements during the 2019–2020 academic year mandating that all residency programs must have policies and practices to achieve appropriate diversity among trainees and faculty. Objective: To explore the perspectives of internal medicine program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) on the ACGME diversity standard. Design: Qualitative study of internal medicine residency program leadership from academic and community programs across the USA. Participants: Current PDs (n = 12) and APDs (n = 8) of accredited US internal medicine residency programs. Approach: We conducted semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews. Data was analyzed using the constant comparative method to extract recurrent themes. Key Results: Three main themes, described by participants, were identified: (1) internal medicine PDs and APDs had limited knowledge of the new Common Program Requirement relating to diversity; (2) program leaders expressed concern that the diversity standard reaches beyond the PDs’ scope of influence and lack of institutional commitment to the successful implementation of diversity standards; (3) participants described narrow view of diversity and inclusion efforts focusing on recruitment strategies during the interview season. Conclusions: Our findings of lack of familiarity with the new diversity standards, and limited institutional investment in diversity and inclusion efforts raise a concern about successful implementation across GME programs. Nevertheless, our finding suggests that structured implementation in the form of education, guideposts, and financial allocation can alleviate some of the concerns of program leadership in meeting the new ACGME diversity standard in a meaningful way