Medical Schools Do a Poor Job Teaching About Disability

By Crystal Lindell

Medical schools don’t teach their students well about disability, which can have negative effects for both disabled patients and disabled medical students, according to a new study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

Researchers found that medical school curriculum often treats disability as a problem, leading students to make negative assumptions about the health and quality of life of people with disabilities. That makes them ill-prepared for treating disabled patients.

The overall attitude also results in fewer disabled people becoming doctors.

“Doctors do not know how to care for people with disabilities because they never learned,” lead author Carol Haywood, PhD, assistant professor at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine, said in a press release.

“Ultimately, our work reveals how medical education may be playing a critical role in creating and perpetuating ideas that people with disabilities are uncommon and unworthy in health care.”

Haywood and her colleagues hosted virtual focus groups for both medical school faculty and students. They found four recurring themes in the discussions:

1. Disability is often neglected in medical education 

Participants said disability was only mentioned in select lectures and elective coursework, largely relegating the training to students and faculty who are already familiar with or have a personal interest in disability. 

One faculty participant said: “The fact that [disability training] is not required, and it’s not seen as a core part of the medical school curriculum … reinforces the idea that these aren’t really your patients or they’re not important enough for you to learn about.”

2. Disability is often framed as a “problem” in medical school 

Most medical schools define disability as a condition where an individual is simply diagnosed and treated, rather than something rooted in physical barriers, social bias and stigmatization. 

One student said: “Just seeing how biases can be sort of continued on through generations of doctors … whether that means that thinking of disability as a tragedy or … a medical condition.”

3. Negative ideas about disability limit diversity in medicine 

Participants described a neglect of disability training as being part of a “hidden curriculum” in medical education that teaches students that disability does not belong in society. Students with disabilities are often viewed as weak or incapable of excelling in medical practice. 

One participant said: “We're just sending the message from the get-go that you’re not welcome, which is so damaging in every possible way.”

4. There’s an over-reliance on faculty and student-led efforts to cultivate change 

When their training fell short, faculty and students sought mentorship and communities to discuss and understand disability-related healthcare. 

One student said: “It’s hard to be mad at physicians …. Because they weren’t taught how to do it or taught to ask the questions, or it wasn’t emphasized.”

Insufficient support from institutional and licensing authorities has also stymied efforts to improve disability training. Disability is often not included in studies focused on mitigating healthcare disparity — despite well-known vulnerabilities of people with disabilities.

“While we have known about physician bias and discrimination against people with disabilities in health care for some years now, this new work emphasizes the need for medical schools and regulating bodies… to take on the responsibility of educating future physicians about the care of people with disabilities,” said co-author Tara Lagu, MD, adjunct professor of medicine and medical social sciences at Feinberg.

Improving disability-related medical education will require systemic reform, such as adding a “disability-competent” to medical education to make students more aware of abelism – a tendency to think that everyone has the same mental and physical abilities.

Other remedies include having disabled guest speakers share their experiences navigating the healthcare system; having physical therapists, occupational therapists and speech language pathologists discuss their treatment of people with disabilities; and having students participate in the care of disabled patients during patient rounds, physical exams, documentation, and clinical decision making.

Study: Some Brains ‘Hardwired’ for Chronic Pain

By Pat Anson, Editor

Why do some people develop chronic pain from an injury or illness, while others do not?

The answer to that question may really be all in our heads.

A groundbreaking study by scientists at Northwestern University and the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago (RIC) found that some people are genetically predisposed to chronic pain because of brain “abnormalities” that raise their risk of developing chronic pain. The findings challenge long-standing views on the science of pain, which emphasize treating pain at the site of the initial injury.

"While simple, the logic of addressing problems at the site of an injury to remove pain has resulted in only limited success," said senior study author Marwan Baliki, PhD, a research scientist at RIC and an assistant professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

"The central processes of chronic pain have largely been ignored, so our research team set out to better understand the brain's role."

Baliki and his colleagues conducted the first longitudinal brain imaging study, which tracked 159 patients for three years following an acute back injury, along with 29 healthy control subjects.  

MRI brain scans were conducted on all of the participants five times during the course of the study.

The researchers found that patients who developed chronic pain from their back injury had a smaller hippocampus and amygdala compared to those who recovered from the injury and the healthy control subjects.

The hippocampus is the primary brain region involved in memory formation and retention, while the amygdala is involved in the processing of emotions and fear. In addition to size variations, these brain regions also showed differences in connections to the rest of the brain, particularly to the frontal cortex, an area involved in judgment.

Together, the researchers estimate that these brain differences accounted for about 60% of the chronic pain felt by participants.

Most importantly, the study also revealed that the volumes of the amygdala and hippocampus did not change over the course of the study, suggesting that those who developed chronic pain were genetically predisposed to it.  

"Here we establish that the gross anatomical properties of the corticolimbic brain, not the initial back pain, determine most of the risk for developing chronic pain," said first author Etienne Vachon-Presseau, PhD, a visiting postdoctoral fellow in physiology at Feinberg.

“As the anatomical risk factors were stable across 3 years, they were presumably hardwired and present prior to the event initiating back pain. These results pave the way for the development of novel and distinct approaches to prevention and treatment of chronic pain.”

The Northwestern and RIC study will be published in the June edition of the journal Brain.