Browsing by Subject "Physician"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Data Report: 2016 Indiana Physician Licensure Survey
    (2016-05) Vaughn, S., Gano, L., Maxey, H.
    The Bowen Center for Health Workforce Research and Policy, formerly called the Bowen Research Center, has a rich history of collecting, analyzing, and disseminating health workforce data and research for the State of Indiana. These health workforce data are important to informing health workforce policy and planning efforts through the State. Although the health workforce is comprised of a myriad of health professionals, the physician workforce may be regarded as the backbone of the healthcare system, which makes collecting and disseminating timely data on the supply and distribution of Indiana’s physician workforce critical to informing any health workforce policy or planning efforts. The 2016 Indiana Physician Licensure Survey Data Report presents key information and data collected from the physician re-licensure survey administered by the Indiana Professional Licensing Agency (IPLA) during physicians’ biennial license renewal. As of 2015, 26,536 physicians were licensed to practice in the State of Indiana. Of these, 10,057 physicians reported having an Indiana practice address. The majority of Indiana physicians reported having only one practice location in the state. Consistent with national trends, Indiana’s physicians are concentrated in populous, urban areas. In addition to understanding the geographic distribution of this workforce, practice characteristics are critical to determining capacity at the community level. A total of 6,285 (62%) physicians reported working 37 hours or more per week in direct patient care. Furthermore, roughly 52% of the physician workforce reported not offering a sliding fee scale. Also, 8.5% of Indiana physicians reported not accepting Medicaid. This report details important demographic and practice characteristics for the physician workforce. The report also examines these data for the primary care physician workforce and the psychiatric workforce. The 2015 Indiana Physician Licensure Survey Data Report presents a snapshot of data on the physician workforce in order to provide stakeholders with information needed to improve the quality and accessibility of health care for Indiana residents through policy making, workforce development, and resource allocation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The lived experiences of Indian nurses working in the United States : perceptions and attitudes towards nurse-physician collaboration
    (2013) Hale, Robyn Kathleen; Fisher, Dr. Mary L.; Sloan, Rebecca S.; Riner, Mary Beth; Ward, Richard E.
    Nurse-physician collaboration has received much attention over the past decade in the USA. The release of three reports from the Institute of Medicine implicated poor communication and collaboration among nurses and physicians as a major contributing factor to the incidence of sentinel events and medical errors. Despite the growing awareness of the imperative related to collaboration between nurses and physicians to ensure patient safety, the problem of poor nurse-physician collaboration remains endemic throughout the country. Indian nurses, along with many other internationally educated nurses, comprise 12-15.2% of the nursing workforce in the USA. Little is known about how Indian nurses culture potentially influences their ability to effectively collaborate with physicians to ensure patient safety. The purpose of this study is to understand Indian nurses’ attitudes and perceptions about nurse-physician collaboration. Hermeneutic interpretive phenomenology as influenced by the work of Martin Heidegger guided this study through the use of interviews via Skype. The overall experience of the Indian nurses was of one experiencing a dramatic positive change in nurse-physician collaboration in the USA as compared to India. Four themes emerged describing this phenomenon: Respect/feeling heard, Being Trusted, Assurance of Accountability, and Finding Freedom. Indian nurses practicing in the USA find a freedom that empowers them to collaborate with physicians for patient safety. They, as all nurses may, benefit from continuing educational opportunities that demonstrate ways to collaborate more fully.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Perspectives on Colon Cancer Screening—A Physician Panel Discussion for Preclinical Medical Students
    (Association of American Medical Colleges, 2020-10) Dilly, Christen K.; Craven, Hannah J.; Molleston, Jean P.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Introduction Colon cancer is the third most common cancer in the US, and the survival rate improves drastically with early detection. It is important for medical students to understand screening options, and to be able to effectively discuss these options with their patients. While basic information about colon cancer screening is ubiquitous in US medical school curricula, no published curricula describe teaching students the nuances of negotiating this discussion with patients and tailoring screening to individual patients' needs. Methods We developed a 90-minute session for second-year medical students as part of a gastroenterology and nutrition course. We provided a short lecture on colon cancer screening. We then had a panel of practicing gastroenterologists and a primary care physician discuss their approaches to six hypothetical cases. The students reflected in writing on what they learned from the session and on their opinions of the session format. Results Of second-year medical students, 139 attended the session and 110 submitted written reflections on the session (79% response rate). The students perceived significant gains in knowledge, communication skills, and attitudes around the discussions. Discussion This expert panel session taught medical students knowledge and communication skills related to colon cancer screening. The session could be easily implemented at any medical school, either at the preclinical or clinical level.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Structure and Funding of Clinical Informatics Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors
    (Thieme, 2024) Patel, Tushar N.; Chaise, Aaron J.; Hanna, John J.; Patel, Kunal P.; Kochendorfer, Karl M.; Medford, Richard J.; Mize, Dara E.; Melnick, Edward R.; Hron, Jonathan D.; Youens, Kenneth; Pandita, Deepti; Leu, Michael G.; Ator, Gregory A.; Yu, Feliciano; Genes, Nicholas; Baker, Carrie K.; Bell, Douglas S.; Pevnick, Joshua M.; Conrad, Steven A.; Chandawarkar, Aarti R.; Rogers, Kendall M.; Kaelber, David C.; Singh, Ila R.; Levy, Bruce P.; Finnell, John T.; Kannry, Joseph; Pageler, Natalie M.; Mohan, Vishnu; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: In 2011, the American Board of Medical Specialties established clinical informatics (CI) as a subspecialty in medicine, jointly administered by the American Board of Pathology and the American Board of Preventive Medicine. Subsequently, many institutions created CI fellowship training programs to meet the growing need for informaticists. Although many programs share similar features, there is considerable variation in program funding and administrative structures. Objectives: The aim of our study was to characterize CI fellowship program features, including governance structures, funding sources, and expenses. Methods: We created a cross-sectional online REDCap survey with 44 items requesting information on program administration, fellows, administrative support, funding sources, and expenses. We surveyed program directors of programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education between 2014 and 2021. Results: We invited 54 program directors, of which 41 (76%) completed the survey. The average administrative support received was $27,732/year. Most programs (85.4%) were accredited to have two or more fellows per year. Programs were administratively housed under six departments: Internal Medicine (17; 41.5%), Pediatrics (7; 17.1%), Pathology (6; 14.6%), Family Medicine (6; 14.6%), Emergency Medicine (4; 9.8%), and Anesthesiology (1; 2.4%). Funding sources for CI fellowship program directors included: hospital or health systems (28.3%), clinical departments (28.3%), graduate medical education office (13.2%), biomedical informatics department (9.4%), hospital information technology (9.4%), research and grants (7.5%), and other sources (3.8%) that included philanthropy and external entities. Conclusion: CI fellowships have been established in leading academic and community health care systems across the country. Due to their unique training requirements, these programs require significant resources for education, administration, and recruitment. There continues to be considerable heterogeneity in funding models between programs. Our survey findings reinforce the need for reformed federal funding models for informatics practice and training.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ‘The greatest man in the world’: on the 50th anniversary of Albert Schweitzer’s death
    (The Conversation US, Inc., 2015-09-04) Gunderman, Richard; Gunderman, Peter; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine