Implicit Bias and Health Disparities Education in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.
| Autor: | Dyess NF; Section of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado., Carr CB; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina., Mavis SC; Division of Neonatal Medicine, Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Caruso CG; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon., Izatt S; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina., French H; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania., Dadiz R; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York., Bonachea EM; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio., Gray MM; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | American journal of perinatology [Am J Perinatol] 2024 Sep; Vol. 41 (12), pp. 1634-1644. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 08. |
| DOI: | 10.1055/a-2240-1979 |
| Abstrakt: | Objective: This study aimed to characterize implicit bias (IB) and health disparities (HD) education in neonatal-perinatal medicine (NPM), including current educational opportunities, resources, and barriers. Study Design: A national web-based survey was sent to NPM fellows, neonatologists, and frontline providers after iterative review by education experts from the National Neonatology Curriculum Committee. Quantitative data were analyzed with chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Qualitative data were evaluated using thematic analysis. Results: Of the 452 NPM survey respondents, most desired additional IB (76%) and HD (83%) education. A greater proportion of neonatologists than fellows received IB (83 vs. 57%) and HD (87 vs. 74%) education. Only 41% of neonatologists reported that their institution requires IB training. A greater proportion of fellows than neonatologists expressed dissatisfaction with the current approaches for IB (51 vs. 25%, p < 0.001) and HD (43 vs. 25%, p = 0.015) education. The leading drivers of dissatisfaction included insufficient time spent on the topics, lack of specificity to NPM, inadequate curricular scope or depth, and lack of local educator expertise. A minority of faculty who were tasked to educate others have received specific educator training on IB (21%) and HD (16%). Thematic analysis of survey free-text responses identified three main themes on the facilitators and barriers to successful IB and HD education: individual , environmental , and curricular design variables . Conclusion: NPM trainees and neonatologists desire tailored, active, and expert-guided IB and HD education. Identified barriers are important to address in developing an effective IB/HD curriculum for the NPM community. Key Points: · There is a gap between the current delivery of IB/HD education and the needs of the NPM community.. · NPM trainees and neonatologists desire tailored, active, and expert-guided IB and HD education.. · A successful curriculum should be widely accessible, NPM-specific, and include facilitator training.. Competing Interests: None declared. (Thieme. All rights reserved.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|