Background: To streamline workflow during peak influenza season in our weekly student-led free Interprofessional Community Clinic (ICC), an additional pharmacist shift solely responsible for providing immunization services was implemented from October 2018 to February 2019. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of adding an immunizing pharmacist, in addition to a clinical pharmacist, on adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine recommendations and overall immunization rates at ICC. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patient visits from October 2017 to February 2019 was conducted. Vaccination rates and CDC recommendation adherence were compared to a historical control when an immunizing pharmacist was not scheduled. Chi-square analysis was performed on categorical data; Fisher’s exact test was used to assess impact of an immunizing pharmacist on vaccination rates and adherence to CDC recommendations. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 78 patient visits and 58 unique patients were included. There was a significant increase in the adherence to CDC recommendations for pneumococcal vaccine when an immunizing pharmacist was present (p=0.02). There was no significant difference in the adherence to CDC recommendations for all other vaccines and overall vaccine rate between the two groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: Implementation of an immunizing pharmacist in an interprofessional clinic significantly impacts the adherence to CDC recommendations for pneumococcal vaccine without significantly impacting the overall vaccine rate. Benefit of an additional pharmacist dedicated to vaccinations should be weighed for workflow improvement versus impact on vaccine adherence and rate.
{"title":"Impact of an Additional Immunizing Pharmacist at an Interprofessional Student-led Clinic for the Underserved","authors":"Khyati Patel, Danielle Candelario, Ateequr Rahman, Melissa Chen","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.251","url":null,"abstract":"Background: To streamline workflow during peak influenza season in our weekly student-led free Interprofessional Community Clinic (ICC), an additional pharmacist shift solely responsible for providing immunization services was implemented from October 2018 to February 2019. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of adding an immunizing pharmacist, in addition to a clinical pharmacist, on adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine recommendations and overall immunization rates at ICC. \u0000Methods: A retrospective chart review of patient visits from October 2017 to February 2019 was conducted. Vaccination rates and CDC recommendation adherence were compared to a historical control when an immunizing pharmacist was not scheduled. Chi-square analysis was performed on categorical data; Fisher’s exact test was used to assess impact of an immunizing pharmacist on vaccination rates and adherence to CDC recommendations. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. \u0000Results: A total of 78 patient visits and 58 unique patients were included. There was a significant increase in the adherence to CDC recommendations for pneumococcal vaccine when an immunizing pharmacist was present (p=0.02). There was no significant difference in the adherence to CDC recommendations for all other vaccines and overall vaccine rate between the two groups (p>0.05). \u0000Conclusion: Implementation of an immunizing pharmacist in an interprofessional clinic significantly impacts the adherence to CDC recommendations for pneumococcal vaccine without significantly impacting the overall vaccine rate. Benefit of an additional pharmacist dedicated to vaccinations should be weighed for workflow improvement versus impact on vaccine adherence and rate.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44901015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jonathan Pan, Andrew M. Leader, Eileen Wang, Nicole Ratnapala, K. Garvey, Ramita Gowda, Joe-Ann Moser, AJ Mell, Theodore Pak, E. Singer, David Thomas, Y. Meah
Introduction: Many immigrants have histories of violence and persecution in their countries of origin that may make them eligible for asylum in the United States. East Harlem Health Outreach Partnership (EHHOP) is a physician-supervised, student-run free clinic (SRFC) of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai that serves exclusively uninsured persons, nearly all of whom are immigrants. This study aimed to provide a screening tool to measure the prevalence of self-reported histories of persecution which may be grounds for asylum and connect these patients to appropriate resources such as legal aid and forensic medical services. Methods: The Screening for Torture, Asylum, and Trauma (STAT) questionnaire was developed to screen patients for potential asylum-eligible histories. The questionnaire probed if participants were ever victims of violence or abuse in their countries of origin and the contexts of such violence. Patients screening positive for trauma which may constitute grounds for an asylum claim (“STAT-positive”) were assigned a case manager to oversee referrals to appropriate resources. Changes in demographics between STAT-positive and STAT-negative patients were determined using Fisher Exact Tests and binomial exact calculations to generate P-values and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI), respectively. Results: Of the 86 patients screened, 27 (31%; 95% CI [0.22-0.42]) were STAT-positive. Nineteen (70%) were interested in applying for asylum and 15 (79%) of these patients were successfully referred to legal assistance programs. Seventeen (63%) were already receiving care at EHHOP’s mental health clinic. Conclusion: There is a high prevalence of patients (31%) within the EHHOP SRFC with histories of violence, abuse, persecution, or discrimination which may be grounds for asylum in the United States. Identifying these patients for targeted interventions may have a significant positive impact for these patients.
{"title":"Screening for Torture, Asylum, and Trauma among Patients Seeking Care in an Urban Student-Run Free Clinic","authors":"Jonathan Pan, Andrew M. Leader, Eileen Wang, Nicole Ratnapala, K. Garvey, Ramita Gowda, Joe-Ann Moser, AJ Mell, Theodore Pak, E. Singer, David Thomas, Y. Meah","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.240","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Many immigrants have histories of violence and persecution in their countries of origin that may make them eligible for asylum in the United States. East Harlem Health Outreach Partnership (EHHOP) is a physician-supervised, student-run free clinic (SRFC) of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai that serves exclusively uninsured persons, nearly all of whom are immigrants. This study aimed to provide a screening tool to measure the prevalence of self-reported histories of persecution which may be grounds for asylum and connect these patients to appropriate resources such as legal aid and forensic medical services. \u0000Methods: The Screening for Torture, Asylum, and Trauma (STAT) questionnaire was developed to screen patients for potential asylum-eligible histories. The questionnaire probed if participants were ever victims of violence or abuse in their countries of origin and the contexts of such violence. Patients screening positive for trauma which may constitute grounds for an asylum claim (“STAT-positive”) were assigned a case manager to oversee referrals to appropriate resources. Changes in demographics between STAT-positive and STAT-negative patients were determined using Fisher Exact Tests and binomial exact calculations to generate P-values and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI), respectively. \u0000Results: Of the 86 patients screened, 27 (31%; 95% CI [0.22-0.42]) were STAT-positive. Nineteen (70%) were interested in applying for asylum and 15 (79%) of these patients were successfully referred to legal assistance programs. Seventeen (63%) were already receiving care at EHHOP’s mental health clinic. \u0000Conclusion: There is a high prevalence of patients (31%) within the EHHOP SRFC with histories of violence, abuse, persecution, or discrimination which may be grounds for asylum in the United States. Identifying these patients for targeted interventions may have a significant positive impact for these patients.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48772503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Susan Greni, Stephanie Radil, Benjamin McIntire, M. Menning
Background: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) provide students space to join and lead the care of patients who may not have access to care elsewhere. This is done under supervision of a physician preceptor who ensures safety and quality care while fostering a learning environment for students. The SRFC cannot function without physician preceptors. Concerns about retention and participation at the Student Health Alliance Reaching Indigent Needy Groups (SHARING) Clinic, a SRFC at University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC), fueled the investigation into motivations and barriers of physician volunteerism. This study aims to find why physicians volunteer and to propose meaningful strategies to increase retention rates at our institution and other SRFCs. Methods: An anonymous electronic survey was emailed to 348 physicians from various departments at UNMC. The survey assessed frequency of volunteerism, motivations and barriers, preceptor experiences, demographic information, and free form questions with respect to volunteering at the university associated SRFC. Results: Of the 348 survey recipients, 49 (13.5%) physicians responded. The most common barriers to physician volunteerism are work (n=23, 59%) and family obligations (n=23, 59%). The most common motivations are the ability to mentor students (n=14, 36%) and help patients in need (n=12, 31%). Of the respondents, 25 (61%) had never previously volunteered at SHARING. Of those who had volunteered, 7 (44%) reported volunteering at SHARING Clinic on average once or less per year over multiple years. Additionally, 13 (81%) volunteers report that they agree or strongly agree that they were satisfied with the experience and that it helped them improve their mentoring relationships with students. Conclusions: Collectively, the results indicate that the physicians sampled feel it is valuable to volunteer at the SRFC but are often impeded by other obligations. SRFCs may implement our proposed strategies to enhance motivations and mitigate barriers to physician volunteering.
{"title":"Why Do Physicians Volunteer at Student-Run Free Clinics? A Look into What Drives or Hinders Their Participation","authors":"Susan Greni, Stephanie Radil, Benjamin McIntire, M. Menning","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.312","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) provide students space to join and lead the care of patients who may not have access to care elsewhere. This is done under supervision of a physician preceptor who ensures safety and quality care while fostering a learning environment for students. The SRFC cannot function without physician preceptors. Concerns about retention and participation at the Student Health Alliance Reaching Indigent Needy Groups (SHARING) Clinic, a SRFC at University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC), fueled the investigation into motivations and barriers of physician volunteerism. This study aims to find why physicians volunteer and to propose meaningful strategies to increase retention rates at our institution and other SRFCs. \u0000Methods: An anonymous electronic survey was emailed to 348 physicians from various departments at UNMC. The survey assessed frequency of volunteerism, motivations and barriers, preceptor experiences, demographic information, and free form questions with respect to volunteering at the university associated SRFC. \u0000Results: Of the 348 survey recipients, 49 (13.5%) physicians responded. The most common barriers to physician volunteerism are work (n=23, 59%) and family obligations (n=23, 59%). The most common motivations are the ability to mentor students (n=14, 36%) and help patients in need (n=12, 31%). Of the respondents, 25 (61%) had never previously volunteered at SHARING. Of those who had volunteered, 7 (44%) reported volunteering at SHARING Clinic on average once or less per year over multiple years. Additionally, 13 (81%) volunteers report that they agree or strongly agree that they were satisfied with the experience and that it helped them improve their mentoring relationships with students. \u0000Conclusions: Collectively, the results indicate that the physicians sampled feel it is valuable to volunteer at the SRFC but are often impeded by other obligations. SRFCs may implement our proposed strategies to enhance motivations and mitigate barriers to physician volunteering.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44918303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Background: JayDoc Free Clinic (JayDoc) is run by medical students at the University of Kansas School of Medicine. Many patients seen at the clinic have limited English proficiency (LEP) and are assisted by volunteer medical interpreters. Formal training for working with interpreters has not previously been part of JayDoc’s volunteer orientation. Methods: An intervention emphasizing education in interpreter standards of practice, effective use of interpreter services, and culturally competent communication were presented to all incoming JayDoc volunteers (i.e., first-year medical students [MS1s]) during their volunteer orientation. Three months post-intervention a voluntary online survey was distributed to assess perceived improvement in effective interpreter partnerships and cultural communication. The survey was administered to MS1s and second-year medical students (MS2s). Responses were stratified using a two-tailed t-score distribution to analyze the impact of the educational intervention on the MS1 group in comparison to the MS2 group that did not receive the intervention. Results: There were one hundred and five respondents (52 MS1s, 53 MS2s). MS2s had a significantly higher average number of interpreter-facilitated patient encounters (MS2 6.38; MS1 2.54; p=0.001). MS1s had a significantly higher average of perceived importance of interpreter training (MS2 4.56; MS1 4.81; p=0.031). All other survey parameters of cultural competency and interpreter-provider best practices were ranked as important by both MS1s and MS2s, without a significant difference between the responses of the two groups. Conclusions: An educational intervention focused on interpreter-provider partnerships and cultural competency resulted in the higher perceived importance of the training session among students.
{"title":"Bridging the Language Gap in Medicine: Quality Improvement for Interpreter Services at JayDoc Free Clinic","authors":"Skyler Trieu, S. Bajpai","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.278","url":null,"abstract":"Background: JayDoc Free Clinic (JayDoc) is run by medical students at the University of Kansas School of Medicine. Many patients seen at the clinic have limited English proficiency (LEP) and are assisted by volunteer medical interpreters. Formal training for working with interpreters has not previously been part of JayDoc’s volunteer orientation. \u0000Methods: An intervention emphasizing education in interpreter standards of practice, effective use of interpreter services, and culturally competent communication were presented to all incoming JayDoc volunteers (i.e., first-year medical students [MS1s]) during their volunteer orientation. Three months post-intervention a voluntary online survey was distributed to assess perceived improvement in effective interpreter partnerships and cultural communication. The survey was administered to MS1s and second-year medical students (MS2s). Responses were stratified using a two-tailed t-score distribution to analyze the impact of the educational intervention on the MS1 group in comparison to the MS2 group that did not receive the intervention. \u0000Results: There were one hundred and five respondents (52 MS1s, 53 MS2s). MS2s had a significantly higher average number of interpreter-facilitated patient encounters (MS2 6.38; MS1 2.54; p=0.001). MS1s had a significantly higher average of perceived importance of interpreter training (MS2 4.56; MS1 4.81; p=0.031). All other survey parameters of cultural competency and interpreter-provider best practices were ranked as important by both MS1s and MS2s, without a significant difference between the responses of the two groups. \u0000Conclusions: An educational intervention focused on interpreter-provider partnerships and cultural competency resulted in the higher perceived importance of the training session among students.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43364049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jennifer M Dias, M. Lui, C. Goldberger, O'Jay Stewart, S. Deeb, Paloma Orozco Scott, Natalie Berger, Terence Hughes, Kevin B. Weiss, James Carter, Jonathan Pan, Megan Paul, Eliott Kim, Ezequiel Ramos, Aishwarya Raja, S. Barazani, Alison Pruzan, Brittany Glassberg, David M. Skovran, David Thomas, Y. Meah
Background: We describe the implementation of a remote operational model to provide targeted, multi-faceted social services during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at the East Harlem Health Outreach Partnership (EHHOP), a student-run, physician-supervised free clinic (SRFC) that serves uninsurable residents of East Harlem in New York City (NYC). The model attempts to mitigate the economic consequences of the pandemic while also safely meeting the needs of patients who were quarantined or otherwise medically vulnerable. Methods: We outline a step-by-step approach required to transition social services to a remote model, across six key workflows: (1) student volunteer recruitment, (2) fundraising, (3) grocery and financial grant allocation, (4) medication delivery, (5) mask delivery and patient education, and (6) broader community engagement. Results: Within 20 days of the first known case of COVID-19 in NYC, we established a protocol for remote care and expanded social services. From March to July 2020, EHHOP volunteers made 221 medication and 172 mask kit no-contact deliveries. To address food and housing insecurity, 140 patients were provided financial grants and an additional 109 received food deliveries. This comprehensive response was supported through emergency fundraising efforts that generated $66,690. Conclusions: By focusing on support for basic needs including food, medication, personal protective equipment, and patient education, EHHOP was able to bolster the safety-net for marginalized patients otherwise excluded from national economic recovery efforts and ensure continuous care for patients with chronic medical illness. EHHOP’s operational model for safe, remote delivery of social services provides other clinics with a framework to guide current and future emergency responses.
{"title":"Delivering Comprehensive Social Services during a Pandemic: Experience of a New York City Student-Run Free Clinic","authors":"Jennifer M Dias, M. Lui, C. Goldberger, O'Jay Stewart, S. Deeb, Paloma Orozco Scott, Natalie Berger, Terence Hughes, Kevin B. Weiss, James Carter, Jonathan Pan, Megan Paul, Eliott Kim, Ezequiel Ramos, Aishwarya Raja, S. Barazani, Alison Pruzan, Brittany Glassberg, David M. Skovran, David Thomas, Y. Meah","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.257","url":null,"abstract":"Background: We describe the implementation of a remote operational model to provide targeted, multi-faceted social services during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at the East Harlem Health Outreach Partnership (EHHOP), a student-run, physician-supervised free clinic (SRFC) that serves uninsurable residents of East Harlem in New York City (NYC). The model attempts to mitigate the economic consequences of the pandemic while also safely meeting the needs of patients who were quarantined or otherwise medically vulnerable. \u0000Methods: We outline a step-by-step approach required to transition social services to a remote model, across six key workflows: (1) student volunteer recruitment, (2) fundraising, (3) grocery and financial grant allocation, (4) medication delivery, (5) mask delivery and patient education, and (6) broader community engagement. \u0000Results: Within 20 days of the first known case of COVID-19 in NYC, we established a protocol for remote care and expanded social services. From March to July 2020, EHHOP volunteers made 221 medication and 172 mask kit no-contact deliveries. To address food and housing insecurity, 140 patients were provided financial grants and an additional 109 received food deliveries. This comprehensive response was supported through emergency fundraising efforts that generated $66,690. \u0000Conclusions: By focusing on support for basic needs including food, medication, personal protective equipment, and patient education, EHHOP was able to bolster the safety-net for marginalized patients otherwise excluded from national economic recovery efforts and ensure continuous care for patients with chronic medical illness. EHHOP’s operational model for safe, remote delivery of social services provides other clinics with a framework to guide current and future emergency responses. ","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47526846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christian Nguyen, Mallory McKeon, Samuel Ufuah, Cooper Lloyd, Eleanor Weaver, Michael Fowler, Robert F. Miller
Food insecurity (FI) is a dynamic and growing problem disproportionately impacting the health of minority and otherwise disadvantaged communities in the United States. Large healthcare systems address FI through screenings, community partnerships, and patient education programs. However, less has been reported on the role of small, student-run free clinics in responding to FI. Free clinics, including student-run free clinics, provide the opportunity to screen for and respond to FI with intimacy and continuity that large healthcare systems often fail to establish in these populations. Here, we aim to describe one clinic’s experience with an in-clinic, free food pantry for uninsured patients in Nashville, Tennessee. We outline the pantry’s evolution, improvement processes implemented, and data collected from July 2018 to June 2021. Data reveal that the burden of FI in our patient population is estimated as high as 80%, exceeding that of regional and national averages. While clinical associations have yet to be assessed, evidence supports the feasibility and utility of an in-clinic food pantry program for reducing the barriers to accessing healthy food in low-resource communities at high risk for FI.
{"title":"Experiences with a Student-Run, In-Clinic Food Donation Program for Uninsured Patients in Nashville","authors":"Christian Nguyen, Mallory McKeon, Samuel Ufuah, Cooper Lloyd, Eleanor Weaver, Michael Fowler, Robert F. Miller","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.316","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.316","url":null,"abstract":"Food insecurity (FI) is a dynamic and growing problem disproportionately impacting the health of minority and otherwise disadvantaged communities in the United States. Large healthcare systems address FI through screenings, community partnerships, and patient education programs. However, less has been reported on the role of small, student-run free clinics in responding to FI. Free clinics, including student-run free clinics, provide the opportunity to screen for and respond to FI with intimacy and continuity that large healthcare systems often fail to establish in these populations. Here, we aim to describe one clinic’s experience with an in-clinic, free food pantry for uninsured patients in Nashville, Tennessee. We outline the pantry’s evolution, improvement processes implemented, and data collected from July 2018 to June 2021. Data reveal that the burden of FI in our patient population is estimated as high as 80%, exceeding that of regional and national averages. While clinical associations have yet to be assessed, evidence supports the feasibility and utility of an in-clinic food pantry program for reducing the barriers to accessing healthy food in low-resource communities at high risk for FI. ","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44749867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
At the Saint Louis University Health Resource Center, all student leadership roles transition yearly, requiring a robust method to maintain institutional knowledge. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) are written documents containing detailed instructions for the completion of functions within a greater organization. SOPs are utilized in clinical settings and may be useful for student-run free clinics (SRFCs). This project sought to formally establish clinic procedures into centralized documents and assess the utility of these documents. We created SOPs for all leader and volunteer positions which were then assembled into Leadership and Volunteer Handbooks for increased accessibility. Two surveys, one for leaders and one for volunteers, were distributed after the 2020-2021 leadership transition period to investigate the utility of the SOPs. Although the response rates were insufficient, results suggest that leader and volunteer respondents found confidence in utilizing the SOPs during the transition period and beyond. SOPs allow our volunteers and leaders to enhance the performance of their roles despite frequent turnover of positions. Per constructive feedback from survey respondents, we plan to improve awareness of SOPs and increase the frequency of updating SOPs to reflect current clinic operations. Future research should evaluate the utility and efficacy of SOPs in other SRFCs through multiple transition cycles of active leaders and volunteers.
{"title":"Incorporation of Standard Operating Procedures for Leadership and Volunteer Transitions in a Student-Run Free Clinic","authors":"Ishitha Jagadish, Neal Modi","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.300","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.300","url":null,"abstract":"At the Saint Louis University Health Resource Center, all student leadership roles transition yearly, requiring a robust method to maintain institutional knowledge. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) are written documents containing detailed instructions for the completion of functions within a greater organization. SOPs are utilized in clinical settings and may be useful for student-run free clinics (SRFCs). This project sought to formally establish clinic procedures into centralized documents and assess the utility of these documents. We created SOPs for all leader and volunteer positions which were then assembled into Leadership and Volunteer Handbooks for increased accessibility. Two surveys, one for leaders and one for volunteers, were distributed after the 2020-2021 leadership transition period to investigate the utility of the SOPs. Although the response rates were insufficient, results suggest that leader and volunteer respondents found confidence in utilizing the SOPs during the transition period and beyond. SOPs allow our volunteers and leaders to enhance the performance of their roles despite frequent turnover of positions. Per constructive feedback from survey respondents, we plan to improve awareness of SOPs and increase the frequency of updating SOPs to reflect current clinic operations. Future research should evaluate the utility and efficacy of SOPs in other SRFCs through multiple transition cycles of active leaders and volunteers.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41447766","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dana Button, Bin Chen, H. Nguyen, Lisa Mah-Park, Alyssa Hjelvik, Rachel Lockard
Bridges Collaborative Care Clinic (BCCC) is a student-led, nonprofit organization providing no-cost health and social services to chronically marginalized populations in Portland, Oregon. In response to physical distancing measures during the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health professions programs across the country suspended in-person clinical activities for students. As a result, BCCC clinical operations were canceled for the foreseeable future. In response, student leaders and volunteers started four health initiatives including the following: 1) organizing a mask-making network to create homemade masks for local organizations in need; 2) forming a real-time capacity needs assessment for local safety net organizations for people with substance use disorders; 3) collaborating with a local Asian health services nonprofit to organize a multilingual volunteer and translator network to deliver food and health supplies to Vietnamese, Korean, Cantonese, and Mandarin speaking elders; and 4) organizing a virtual 5K run/walk fundraiser for an organization that provides temporary housing and other services for the houseless community in Portland. The lessons learned from these pandemic response initiatives are summarized here for student-run clinics, educators, and others interested in starting similar initiatives.
{"title":"Pivoting to Respond to COVID-19: Lessons Learned from Health Initiatives of a Student-Run Clinic","authors":"Dana Button, Bin Chen, H. Nguyen, Lisa Mah-Park, Alyssa Hjelvik, Rachel Lockard","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.290","url":null,"abstract":"Bridges Collaborative Care Clinic (BCCC) is a student-led, nonprofit organization providing no-cost health and social services to chronically marginalized populations in Portland, Oregon. In response to physical distancing measures during the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health professions programs across the country suspended in-person clinical activities for students. As a result, BCCC clinical operations were canceled for the foreseeable future. In response, student leaders and volunteers started four health initiatives including the following: 1) organizing a mask-making network to create homemade masks for local organizations in need; 2) forming a real-time capacity needs assessment for local safety net organizations for people with substance use disorders; 3) collaborating with a local Asian health services nonprofit to organize a multilingual volunteer and translator network to deliver food and health supplies to Vietnamese, Korean, Cantonese, and Mandarin speaking elders; and 4) organizing a virtual 5K run/walk fundraiser for an organization that provides temporary housing and other services for the houseless community in Portland. The lessons learned from these pandemic response initiatives are summarized here for student-run clinics, educators, and others interested in starting similar initiatives.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44531039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Meredith Huszagh, Jeremy B Hatcher, C. Grimaldi, N. Kloosterman, D. Carranza-León, Xuanyi Li, Lina M. Sulieman, Rosette Chakkalakal, K. Niswender
Introduction: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) can prevent or delay the development of type 2 diabetes in at-risk individuals. Although low-resource and minority communities have higher rates of type 2 diabetes, these communities often have limited DPP participation due to cost and program accessibility. We evaluated whether a high-fidelity, reduced-cost 16-week DPP could feasibly be implemented by student volunteers and be effective in facilitating the target 5% weight loss goal among participants. Methods: Uninsured, Spanish-speaking participants and their invited guests were recruited from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s student-run clinic. Weekly DPP sessions were conducted using the CDC’s Prevent T2 curriculum in Spanish, delivered in-person for 6 weeks and virtually for the remaining 10 weeks due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic. Participant attendance and weight data were collected. Pre- and post-program health-related quality of life was assessed using the EuroQoL 5D5L tool, and qualitative program feedback surveys were administered. Changes in weight and quality of life as a function of program session attendance and patient demographics were determined primarily using Wilcoxon tests. Results: Of the 17 participants actively engaged in the student-led DPP, 13 were clinic patients and 4 were invited guests. The median weight loss achieved by participants was 5.90% of their total body weight. 13 of the 17 participants (76.50%) achieved the 5% weight loss goal. Age, sex, pre-program body mass index, and English proficiency were not associated with the achievement of the 5% weight loss goal. Though not statistically significant, patients’ average self-scored general health rating (0-100) improved from 72.30 to 81.50 (p=0.12), and the greatest reductions in health limitations were reported with regards to pain (1.94 to 1.70, p=0.28) and daily activities (1.53 to 1.35, p=0.36). Conclusion: A student-run DPP implementation among low-resource participants is feasible and appears capable of achieving the target 5% weight loss.
{"title":"Evaluation of a Diabetes Prevention Program Implementation in a Student-Run Free Clinic Setting","authors":"Meredith Huszagh, Jeremy B Hatcher, C. Grimaldi, N. Kloosterman, D. Carranza-León, Xuanyi Li, Lina M. Sulieman, Rosette Chakkalakal, K. Niswender","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.259","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) can prevent or delay the development of type 2 diabetes in at-risk individuals. Although low-resource and minority communities have higher rates of type 2 diabetes, these communities often have limited DPP participation due to cost and program accessibility. We evaluated whether a high-fidelity, reduced-cost 16-week DPP could feasibly be implemented by student volunteers and be effective in facilitating the target 5% weight loss goal among participants. \u0000Methods: Uninsured, Spanish-speaking participants and their invited guests were recruited from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s student-run clinic. Weekly DPP sessions were conducted using the CDC’s Prevent T2 curriculum in Spanish, delivered in-person for 6 weeks and virtually for the remaining 10 weeks due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic. Participant attendance and weight data were collected. Pre- and post-program health-related quality of life was assessed using the EuroQoL 5D5L tool, and qualitative program feedback surveys were administered. Changes in weight and quality of life as a function of program session attendance and patient demographics were determined primarily using Wilcoxon tests. \u0000Results: Of the 17 participants actively engaged in the student-led DPP, 13 were clinic patients and 4 were invited guests. The median weight loss achieved by participants was 5.90% of their total body weight. 13 of the 17 participants (76.50%) achieved the 5% weight loss goal. Age, sex, pre-program body mass index, and English proficiency were not associated with the achievement of the 5% weight loss goal. Though not statistically significant, patients’ average self-scored general health rating (0-100) improved from 72.30 to 81.50 (p=0.12), and the greatest reductions in health limitations were reported with regards to pain (1.94 to 1.70, p=0.28) and daily activities (1.53 to 1.35, p=0.36). \u0000Conclusion: A student-run DPP implementation among low-resource participants is feasible and appears capable of achieving the target 5% weight loss.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45256061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sarah Hopfer, Reese Miller, Olivia Neese, Sarah Swiezy
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has presented a unique challenge to student-run free clinics (SRFCs), with many closing for several months and all needing to find ways to adapt to the new “normal” of the pandemic. While the prospect of new variants and higher surges continues to threaten our ability to keep SRFC doors open to serve the neediest patients among our community, we present here arguments from need, practicality, safety, and ethics that COVID-19 is the ideal time to maintain—and, even expand—the services SRFCs provide. With so many patients relying on SRFCs for their primary care and with the ability to use precautionary measures to safely see and treat patients, SRFCs should play a vital role in helping the overburdened healthcare system continue to function and provide needed care, despite the devastating impacts of COVID-19.
{"title":"The Case for the Safe Re-Opening of Student-Run Clinics during COVID-19","authors":"Sarah Hopfer, Reese Miller, Olivia Neese, Sarah Swiezy","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v8i1.288","url":null,"abstract":"Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has presented a unique challenge to student-run free clinics (SRFCs), with many closing for several months and all needing to find ways to adapt to the new “normal” of the pandemic. While the prospect of new variants and higher surges continues to threaten our ability to keep SRFC doors open to serve the neediest patients among our community, we present here arguments from need, practicality, safety, and ethics that COVID-19 is the ideal time to maintain—and, even expand—the services SRFCs provide. With so many patients relying on SRFCs for their primary care and with the ability to use precautionary measures to safely see and treat patients, SRFCs should play a vital role in helping the overburdened healthcare system continue to function and provide needed care, despite the devastating impacts of COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47600383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：