Laura Tilley

Military physicians must be prepared to lead health care teams across complex landscapes of war during future small- and large-scale combat operations. This preparation optimally begins in medical school so that early career physicians are fully ready for their first deployment. Past qualitative research has suggested that military physicians who attended civilian medical school are not as well prepared for the operational environment as physicians who attended the Uniformed Services University (USU), our nation’s military medical school. However, there is a lack of larger-scale quantitative research comparing the readiness differences between the two medical school pathways. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to quantify any differences in first deployment preparation between students attending USU and civilian medical schools through the Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP). We compared USU and HPSP graduates’ first deployment experiences by distributing a 14-item Likert survey to active duty military physicians in the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Air Force who graduated within the past 10 years from medical school (USU or civilian). The USU graduates rated themselves significantly higher than the HPSP graduates on their readiness for deployment (3.83 vs. 3.24; P < .001); ability to navigate the operational environment (3.59 vs. 2.99; P < .001); confidence in communicating with their commanding officer (3.59 vs. 2.99; P = .002); navigating the combined role as physician and officer (3.33 vs. 2.84; P = .004); leading a health care team (3.94 vs. 3.43; P = .001); preparation by a medical school (3.78 vs. 2.52; P < .001); and overall readiness compared to peers (4.20 vs. 3.49; P < .001). There was no significant difference between the two pathways regarding their stress level at the beginning of deployment (2.74 vs. 2.68; P = .683); clinical preparation (3.94 vs. 3.76; P = .202); and success of first deployment (3.87 vs. 3.91; P = .792). The largest effect size of the difference between the two pathways was noted on the question “How well did medical school prepare you for your first deployment” (Cohen’s d = 1.02). While both groups believed that they were prepared for their first deployment, USU graduates consistently reported being more prepared by medical school for their first deployment than HPSP graduates. To close this readiness gap, supplemental military unique curricula may help to optimize HPSP students’ readiness.

Operation Bushmaster is a high-fidelity military medical field practicum for fourth-year medical students at the Uniformed Services University. During Operation Bushmaster, students treat live-actor and mannequin-based simulated patients in wartime scenarios throughout the five-day practicum. This study explored the impact of participating in Operation Bushmaster on students’ decision-making in a high-stress, operational environment, a crucial aspect of their future role as military medical officers. A panel of emergency medicine physician experts used a modified Delphi technique to develop a rubric to evaluate the participants’ decision-making abilities under stress. The participants’ decision-making was assessed before and after participating in either Operation Bushmaster (control group) or completing asynchronous coursework (experimental group). A paired-samples t-test was conducted to detect any differences between the means of the participants’ pre- and posttest scores. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Uniformed Services University #21-13079. A significant difference was detected in the pre- and posttest scores of students who attended Operation Bushmaster (P < .001), while there was no significant difference in the pre- and posttest scores of students who completed online, asynchronous coursework (P = .554). Participating in Operation Bushmaster significantly improved the control group participants’ medical decision-making under stress. The results of this study confirm the effectiveness of high-fidelity simulation-based education for teaching decision-making skills to military medical students.

Introduction: Formative feedback is critical for trainees’ growth and development. However, there is a gap in the professional literature regarding the ways in which formative feedback affects student performance during simulation. This grounded theory study addresses this gap by exploring the ways in which medical students received and integrated ongoing formative feedback throughout a multiday, high-fidelity military medical simulation, Operation Bushmaster. Materials and Methods: Our research team interviewed 18 fourth-year medical students in order to investigate how they processed formative feedback during the simulation. Guided by the grounded theory tradition of qualitative research, our research team used open coding and axial coding to categorize the data. We then used selective coding to determine the casual relationships between each of the categories that emerged from the data. These relationships determined our grounded theory framework. Results: Four phases emerged from the data and provided a framework to delineate the process in which students received and integrated formative feedback throughout the simulation: (1) ability to self-assess, (2) self-efficacy, (3) leadership and teamwork, and (4) appreciation of feedback for personal and professional growth. The participants first focused on feedback related to their individual performance but then shifted to a teamwork and leadership mindset. Once they adapted this new mindset, they began to intentionally provide feedback to their peers, increasing their team’s performance. At the end of the simulation, the participants recognized the benefits of formative feedback and peer feedback for ongoing professional development throughout their careers, signifying a growth mindset. Conclusions: This grounded theory study provided a framework for determining how medical students integrated formative feedback during a high-fidelity, multiday medical simulation. Medical educators can use this framework to intentionally guide their formative feedback in order to maximize student learning during simulation.

Introduction: The Uniformed Services University (USU) implemented the Enlisted to Medical Degree Preparatory Program (EMDP2) with the goal of enhancing the diversity of the military physician corps. Programs like EMDP2 can assist students in making the social and intellectual transition from undergraduate studies to medical school and beyond. These types of programs are also opportunities to reduce health disparities and prepare students to work in multicultural settings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there was any significant difference in performance between USU medical students who had attended the EMDP2 and those who had not. Materials and Methods: We compared the results of National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Clinical Science Subjects, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exams of EMDP2 learners from the School of Medicine classes of 2020 to 2023 to those of four similarly sized cohorts of their peers who varied by age and prior military service. Results: We found that the performance of EMDP2 graduates was comparable to their peers who followed more traditional and other alternative paths to medical school. For example, regression models showed that EMDP2 status was not a statistically significant predictor of average clerkship NBME exam score, nor of USMLE Step 1 failure. Conclusion: EMDP2 graduates performed on a par with their medical school peers, and EMDP2 status does not appear to influence NBME or USMLE performance. EMDP2 provides a focused curriculum and addresses the mandate to make medical education opportunities available to a more diverse population.

The response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in New York City (NYC) included unprecedented support from the DoD—a response limited primarily to medical and public health response on domestic soil with intact infrastructure. This study seeks to identify the common perspectives, experiences, and challenges of DoD personnel participating in this historic response. This is a phenomenological qualitative study of 16 military health care providers who deployed to NYC in March 2020. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the USU (No. DBS.2020.123). All participants served on either the United States Naval Ship Comfort or at the Javits Center. We conducted semi-structured interviews exploring the participants’ experiences while deployed to NYC. These interview scripts were then independently coded by five research team members. We identified four common themes and 12 subthemes from the participants’ responses. The themes (subthemes) were lack of preparation (unfamiliar mission and inadequate resources); confusion about integration with civilian health care (widespread, dynamic situation, and NYC overwhelmed), communication challenges (overall, misunderstanding and miscommunication resulting in tension, and patient handoffs); and adaptation and success (general, military–civilian liaison service, positive experience, and military support necessity). This study provides unique insight into the DoD’s initial response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in NYC. Using this experiential feedback from the DoD’s pandemic responders could aid planners in improving the rapidity, effectiveness, and safety of military and civilian health care system integrations that may arise in the future.

Introduction: The role of the military medical officer is complex, as it encapsulates officer, physician, and leader. Professional identity formation is therefore essential for military medical students and junior military physicians to successfully execute the responsibilities of the military medical officer in their future careers. Because little is known regarding best practices for professional identity formation training for military physicians, this study explored the ways in which medical students conceptualized the complex roles of the military medical officer during a medical field practicum. Materials and Methods: Guided by the phenomenological tradition of qualitative research, we interviewed 15 fourth-year medical students twice regarding their understanding of the role of the military medical officer, as they progressed through a 5-day high-fidelity military medical field practicum, Operation Bushmaster. Our research team then analyzed the interview transcripts for emerging themes and patterns, which served as the results of this study. Results: The following themes emerged from the data regarding the participants’ conceptualization of the military medical officer: (1) the scope of the role of the military medical officer; (2) the intersecting identities of the military medical officer; and (3) the adaptable role of the military medical officer in an operational environment. As they progressed through the medical field practicum, the participants articulated a clear understanding of the vast and complex nature of the military medical officer’s intersecting roles as officer, physician, and leader in austere and often unpredictable environments. At the end of the medical field practicum, the participants expressed confidence in carrying out their roles as military medical officers during their future deployments. Conclusions: This study provided an in-depth understanding of the participants’ conceptualization of the military medical officer. The participants described how the medical field practicum provided them with opportunities to experience first-hand and therefore better understand the roles of the military medical officer while leading a health care team in an operational environment. As a result, high-fidelity medical field practicums like Operation Bushmaster appear to be an effective tool for facilitating professional identity formation.