Impact of COVID-19 on Hematology-Oncology Fellowship Programs: A Quantitative and Qualitative Survey Assessment of Fellowship Program Directors

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented challenges in medical training, and we sought to assess the specific impact of COVID-19 on hematology-oncology (HO) fellowship programs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional anonymous online survey of 103 HO program directors (PDs) in conjunction with the American Society of Hematology (ASH) and ASCO. We sought to assess the specific impact of COVID-19 on HO fellowship programs' clinical, educational, and research activities, evaluate perceptions regarding PD and trainee emotional and mental health, and identify ways to support programs. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, parametric and nonparametric tests, and multivariable logistic regression models. Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed with thematic analysis. RESULTS: Significant changes to fellowship activities included transitioning fellow training from outpatient clinics to telehealth (77.7%), shifting to virtual education (94.2%), and moving to remote research work (63.1%). A minority (21.4%) of PDs reported that their fellows were redeployed to cover non-HO services. Most PDs (54.4%) believed COVID-19 had a slight negative impact on fellowship training. PD self-reported burnout increased significantly from 15.5% prepandemic to 44.7% during the pandemic, and most PDs witnessed minor signs of fellow burnout (52.4%). Common PD concerns included inadequate supervision for telehealth activities, reduced opportunities for fellow advancement and promotion, lack of professional development activities, limited research operations and funding, program financial constraints, and virtual recruitment. CONCLUSION: We encourage institutions and national societies to allocate resources and develop programs that can support fellowships and mitigate the potential negative effects of COVID-19 on trainee and PD career development.

Food Insecurity: Child Care Programs’ Perspectives

Background Households experiencing "food insecurity" have limited access to food due to a lack of money or resources. Poor nutrition, from food insecurity, can impact physical and cognitive development of children. Study objectives were to document the prevalence of Tennessee child care programs screening for food insecurity, explore differences between programs receiving child and adult care food program (CACFP) funding and those screening for food insecurity, and understand possible burdens food insecurity places on child care families as perceived by child care program directors. Methods In this cross-sectional study of licensed Tennessee child care programs, a 10-question survey and four-question follow-up survey were electronically distributed. Analysis included descriptive statistics, a chi-square of programs receiving CACFP funds and screening for food insecurity, and themes analysis of open-ended responses. Results The average child care program enrollment (N = 272) was 80.16 with programs serving mostly preschoolers (98.53%) and toddlers (91.91%). Over half (56.99%) of programs reported they received CACFP funding, yet only 9.19% screen for food insecurity. Chi-square analysis found that programs receiving CACFP funds differ significantly on whether they screen households for food insecurity $$\chi$$ χ 2 (1, n = 237) = 16.93, p ≤ 0.001. Themes analysis (n = 41) revealed that many child care program directors do not view food insecurity as a burden for families. Conclusions Child care programs receiving CACFP funds are more likely to screen families for food insecurity than programs who do not. Programs indicate a willingness to include food insecurity screening questions on child care paperwork.

HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Training in Family Medicine Residencies: A National Survey

Background and Objectives: Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) reduces HIV transmission among high-risk individuals. Yet, the HIV epidemic continues to expand among marginalized populations and America’s Southeastern states. Various barriers remain to PrEP uptake, namely provider knowledge and education. We sought to investigate residency training, competency, and prescribing of PrEP among population size. Additionally, we asked program directors to identify barriers to PrEP. Methods: We surveyed family medicine program directors as part of the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance survey from January 2018 through February 2018. Results: Our survey questions had a 52.9% (276/522) response rate. No programs in rural communities less than 30,000 population (0/27) reported significant PrEP training for their residents; those in nonrural communities of at least 30,000 reported this training more frequently (41/246, 16.7%). Compared to Fischer expected values, the finding was statistically significant (P=.019); using a 75,000 population demarcation lowered significance (P=.192). We found programs that identify significant PrEP training also cite more PrEP prescribing within their practice (OR 7.27, P<.001). Programs with significant training also report their residents graduate with greater PrEP competency (OR 18.33, P<.001). The largest barriers identified were faculty expertise, not having enough high-risk patients, inadequate screening, and resident knowledge/training. Conclusions: We identified natural associations between increased training in PrEP and perceived PrEP competencies. We identified a lack of significant PrEP training and associated PrEP competencies in rural residency programs. Barriers identified in this study can help inform curricular needs to improve primary care workforce capacity to lower HIV risk.