BACKGROUND: Women remain underrepresented in leadership roles, faculty roles, and among residents in orthopaedic surgery. It has been suggested that having women in leadership positions in orthopaedic surgery may help to increase the gender diversity of residency programs. However, to our knowledge, no study has explored the relationship, if any, between the gender of the residency program director and the percentage of women in the residency program.
OBJECTIVE: (1) Is the program director\'s gender associated with differences in the percentage of women orthopaedic surgery residents? (2) Do women and men differ in the time to appointment of program director?
METHODS: A list of 207 orthopaedic surgery residencies was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website for the academic year 2021 to 2022. The study excluded 6% (13) of programs; 4% (8) were those without ACGME accreditation and those with initial accreditation, and 2% (5) did not have updated 2021 to 2022 resident lists. Descriptive information on 194 programs was obtained from publicly accessible resources from July 2021 through July 2022. The institution\'s website and the American Medical Association\'s (AMA) Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) was used to collect residency program characteristics and resident demographics [ 2 ]. Doximity, Healthgrades, and LinkedIn were used to further collect current orthopaedic surgery residency program director demographics, including gender, age, and education/training history. To determine gender, photographs and pronouns (she/her/hers or he/him/hers) used in their biographies were used first. To confirm this, secondary sources were used including their NPI profile, which lists gender; Doximity; and their LinkedIn profile. Scopus was used to analyze research output by the program directors-using the Hirsch index (h-index) as the primary bibliometric metric. A total of 194 program directors were identified, of whom of 12% (23) were women and 88% (171) were men. Of the 4421 total residents among these programs, 20% (887) were women and 80% (3534) were men. A univariate analysis comparing program directors was conducted, with continuous variables analyzed using an independent-sample t-test and categorical variables analyzed using a Pearson chi-square test. With the numbers available, a post hoc statistical power calculation indicated that we could detect an 32% difference in the percentage of women in a program as significant with 80% power at the p < 0.05 level, whereas we might have been underpowered to discern smaller differences than that.
RESULTS: With the numbers available, we found no difference in the percentage of women in residency programs run by women program directors than in programs in which the program director was a man (22% [125 of 558] versus 20% [762 of 3863], mean difference 2% [95% CI -1.24% to 7.58%]; p = 0.08). Comparing women to men program directors, women had fewer years between residency completion and appointment to the position of program director (8 ± 2 years versus 12 ± 7 years, mean difference 4 years [95% CI 2.01 to 7.93 years]; p = 0.02) and had a lower mean h-index (7 ± 4 versus 11 ± 11, mean difference 4 [95% CI 1.70 to 6.56]; p = 0.03) and number of publications (24 ± 23 versus 41 ± 62, mean difference 17 [95% CI 3.98 to 31.05]; p = 0.01), although they did not differ in terms of their advanced degrees, duration of training, or likelihood of having taken a fellowship.
CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic residency programs that were run by women did not contain a higher percentage of women residents, suggesting that the gender of the individual in that role may not be as important as has been speculated by others. Future studies should investigate the intersectionality of gender, race, and ethnicity of residents, program directors, and current faculty.
CONCLUSIONS: The fact that women were placed in program director roles earlier in career may also carry special jeopardy for them. Those roles are difficult and can impair a faculty member\'s ability to conduct individual research, which often is key to further academic promotions. Given that and the fact that the gender of the program director was not associated with differences in gender composition of residency programs, we believe that increasing mentorship and access to pipeline programs will help promote diversity in residency programs.

Nurse managers and medical directors play integral roles in ensuring the delivery of high-quality care. Nurse managers oversee day-to-day operations, coordinating staffing, patient care, and resource allocation. They are responsible for fostering a supportive environment for nursing staff while upholding standards of excellence in patient care. Medical directors bring their clinical expertise and leadership, guiding treatment protocols and ensuring adherence to best practices. Together, nurse managers and medical directors form a dynamic partnership in which collaboration is paramount. By synergizing their respective strengths, nurse managers and medical directors can optimize patient outcomes, streamline processes, and drive continuous improvement initiatives. Effective communication and mutual respect are foundational to this collaboration because they work hand-in-hand to navigate complex medical challenges and uphold standards of excellence. In this symbiotic relationship, the ultimate goal is to produce quality care that enhances patient well-being and satisfaction.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

The life insurance industry is transitioning towards precision underwriting driven by increased data availability and access to advanced analytical tools. Effectively utilizing diverse data sources in life insurance underwriting presents an opportunity for medical directors to fully leverage their skillset in this evolving environment. By navigating these changes, balancing the value of data against its limitations, and fostering collaborative approaches to enhance risk assessment and underwriting processes, medical directors can maintain a pivotal role in the life insurance companies of tomorrow.

In Australia, there are only two publicly reported disciplinary cases against specialist medical administrators. In the most recent decision of Medical Board of Australia v Gruner, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal confirmed that specialist medical administrators owe patients and the public the same professional obligations as medical practitioners with direct patient contact. More controversially, the Tribunal also held that medical administrators have a professional obligation only to accept roles with clear position descriptions that afford them sufficient time and resources to ensure the safe delivery of health services. We argue that this imposes unrealistic expectations on medical administrators engaged by rural, regional, or private health services that already struggle to attract and retain specialist medical expertise. This may exacerbate existing health inequalities by disincentivising specialist medical administrators from seeking fractional appointments that assist under-funded areas of workforce shortage.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how Chief Medical Officers experience their role in the municipalities´ work with making the public health overview documents, demanded by the Norwegian Public Health Act from 2012.
METHODS: A qualitative study with semi-structured focus group interviews with 21 Chief Medical Officers from 20 different municipalities in Norway. The interviews were conducted in 2017. The data were analyzed thematically.
RESULTS: The Chief Medical Officers were mainly positive to participating in making public health overview documents. They took on roles as leaders of the work, medical advisors, data collectors towards local GPs and listening post to other sectors. Organizational factors like too small positions and a lack of tradition to involve the CMO in public health work were experienced as barriers to their involvement. The collaboration with the public health coordinators was said to be rewarding, and the intersectoral process involved employees from other sectors in a new way in public health. Although there were some positive experiences, several CMOs considered the use and impact of the public health overview document as limited.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a large variation in the amount and the type of involvement the Chief Medical Officers had in making the public health overview documents in Norwegian municipalities. More research is needed to understand if this has any consequences for the quality of public health work in the municipalities and whether it is a sign of a changing role of the Chief Medical Officers.

OBJECTIVE: Insufficient evidence-based recommendations to guide care for patients with devastating brain injuries (DBIs) leave patients vulnerable to inconsistent practice at the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) interface. We sought to characterize the beliefs of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) and critical care medicine (CCM) physician site directors regarding current management practices for patients with DBI.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EM and CCM physician directors of adult EDs and ICUs across Canada (December 2022 to March 2023). Our primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who manage (or consult on) patients with DBI in the ED. We conducted subgroup analyses to compare beliefs of EM and CCM physicians.
RESULTS: Of 303 eligible respondents, we received 98 (32%) completed surveys (EM physician directors, 46; CCM physician directors, 52). Most physician directors reported participating in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining measures (WLSM) for patients with DBI in the ED (80%, n = 78), but 63% of these (n = 62) said this was infrequent. Physician directors reported that existing neuroprognostication methods are rarely sufficient to support WLSM in the ED (49%, n = 48) and believed that an ICU stay is required to improve confidence (99%, n = 97). Most (96%, n = 94) felt that providing caregiver visitation time prior to WLSM was a valid reason for ICU admission.
CONCLUSIONS: In our survey of Canadian EM and CCM physician directors, 80% participated in WLSM in the ED for patients with DBI. Despite this, most supported ICU admission to optimize neuroprognostication and patient-centred end-of-life care, including organ donation.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L’insuffisance des recommandations fondées sur des données probantes pour guider les soins aux individus atteints de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices rend ces personnes vulnérables à des pratiques incohérentes à la jonction entre le service des urgences et de l’unité de soins intensifs (USI). Nous avons cherché à caractériser les croyances des directeurs médicaux canadiens en médecine d’urgence et médecine de soins intensifs concernant les pratiques de prise en charge actuelles des personnes ayant subi une lésion cérébrale dévastatrice. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé un sondage transversal auprès des directeurs médicaux des urgences et des unités de soins intensifs pour adultes du Canada (décembre 2022 à mars 2023). Notre critère d’évaluation principal était la proportion de répondant·es qui prennent en charge (ou jouent un rôle de consultation auprès) des personnes atteintes de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l’urgence. Nous avons effectué des analyses en sous-groupes pour comparer les croyances des médecins des urgences et des soins intensifs. RéSULTATS: Sur les 303 personnes répondantes admissibles, 98 (32 %) ont répondu aux sondages (directions médicales des urgences, 46; directions médicales d’USI, 52). La plupart des directeurs médicaux ont déclaré avoir participé à la décision de retirer des traitements de maintien des fonctions vitales (TFMV) pour des patient·es atteint·es de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l’urgence (80 %, n = 78), mais 63 % (n = 62) ont déclaré que c’était peu fréquent. Les directions médicales ont indiqué que les méthodes de neuropronostic existantes sont rarement suffisantes pour appuyer le retrait des TMFV à l’urgence (49 %, n = 48) et croyaient qu’un séjour aux soins intensifs était nécessaire pour améliorer leur confiance en ces méthodes (99 %, n = 97). La plupart (96 %, n = 94) estimaient que le fait d’offrir du temps de visite aux personnes soignantes avant le retrait des TMFV était un motif valable d’admission aux soins intensifs. CONCLUSION: Dans le cadre de notre sondage mené auprès des directions médicales des services d’urgence et des USI au Canada, 80 % d’entre elles ont participé au retrait de TMFV à l’urgence pour des patient·es souffrant de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices. Malgré cela, la plupart d’entre elles étaient en faveur d’une admission aux soins intensifs afin d’optimiser le neuropronostic et les soins de fin de vie axés sur les patient·es, y compris le don d’organes.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。