Trump's Immigration Policies Are Making It Harder for Foreign Doctors to Work in the U.S. — And That Could Hurt Patients
It's only the latest threat to foreign medical graduates
For
 the past four years, Daniel, an Israeli-born doctor completing a 
medical residency in the U.S., has secured an H-1B visa for temporary 
specialized workers without a hitch. But this May, without warning, the 
government put his status in the U.S. in danger.
Daniel,
 who withheld his last name for fear of retaliation, is one of many 
foreign-born medical residents across the country who have received visa
 rejections or delays since mid-April — similar to rejections thousands 
of H-1B applicants in other high-paying industries have recently received — prompting a flurry of legal activity from medical groups, hospital systems and individual doctors.
His
 situation is only the latest threat to international medical graduates.
 Several immigration policy changes under the Trump administration have 
left them deterred from or unable to practice medicine in the U.S. — 
which could be disastrous for a health care system already in the midst 
of a growing physician shortage. The changes could particularly affect 
patient care in community and underserved urban hospitals.
“I don’t want to sound paranoid, but I just think the current 
administration is trying to intimidate foreign workers and trying to 
intimidate hospital systems,” Daniel says. “For somebody who’s lived in 
the country for four years, that’s definitely not something I was 
expecting.” (A White House spokesperson referred TIME to United States 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and did not offer a 
separate comment.)
In Daniel’s case, after presenting USCIS with 
the same Association of American Medical Colleges resident stipend 
estimates that he’s used in his application for the last four years, 
USCIS responded with a request for evidence (RFE) seeking more specific,
 localized data — data that he says does not exist for resident 
physicians. Unless he can come up with it or mount a convincing enough 
legal argument before his visa expires on June 30 — the day before many 
medical residency programs begin across the country — Daniel will have 
to go back to Israel almost immediately, leaving his training unfinished
 and his hospital short a doctor.
The visa situation threatens the status of thousands of training 
physicians nationwide — roughly 25% of foreign medical residents in the 
U.S. rely on H-1B visas — and prompted a number of medical organizations
 to send a joint letter
 to the USCIS on May 30 expressing concern about the change. USCIS 
spokesman Michael Bars told TIME that any requests for evidence are in 
line with existing laws and standards.
“USCIS recognizes the use 
of valid private wage surveys by petitioners to establish the prevailing
 wage for an H-1B petition,” Bars said in a statement. “However, USCIS 
will continue to issue RFEs or denials, if appropriate, when officers 
determine that the petitioner has not established eligibility for the 
benefit sought. In keeping with the law as directed by the President’s 
Buy America, Hire America Executive Order as well as the intention of 
Congress, ensuring that H-1B employers are complying with all 
eligibility requirements serves to safeguard the integrity of the 
program to protect the wages, working conditions, and jobs of U.S. 
workers.”
In a second statement, Bars added that, “USCIS continues
 to review issues pertaining to private wage surveys and will consider 
issuing additional guidance to our officers in the future, if needed. If
 a petitioner has questions or concerns about its case, it may send an 
inquiry to USCIS through appropriate customer service channels.”
While
 the exact number of foreign doctors affected by policy changes isn’t 
known, signs of the trend have appeared in a few ways. Fewer 
non-U.S.-citizen international medical graduates registered for the 
residency match this year than in any since 2005, according to the 2018 Main Residency Match report.
 The number who became active applicants (7,067) was the lowest since 
2012, the report adds. In 2016, for example, that number was closer to 
7,500.
The downturn seems especially pronounced among residents of countries included in President Donald Trump’s original 2017 travel ban. (A revised travel ban looks likely to be upheld by the Supreme Court.) By recent estimates, about 8,000 doctors practicing in the U.S. were trained in countries included in the original ban.
Eighteen
 percent fewer doctors from countries included in Trump’s executive 
order came through the group that helps international medical graduates 
get certifications necessary to practice in the U.S., the Educational 
Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG), in 2017, according to 
the group’s president, Dr. William Pinsky. There’s also been an overall 
drop in the number of people applying for ECFMG certification over the 
past two years, he says.
“I’m hoping that the trend, or almost 
trend, that we’re seeing is because people are just waiting to see 
what’s going to happen,” Pinsky says. “But the fact is, there are 
opportunities for training around the world other than the United 
States.”
That’s something Sanaz Attaripour-Isfahani knows well. An
 international medical graduate trained in Iran and currently completing
 a fellowship in the U.S., Attaripour-Isfahani says she doesn’t regret 
the five-year logistical battle and multiple visa application denials it
 took to get here for residency. But she’s already seen that not 
everyone feels that way: Her sister, a doctor in Iran, decided to pursue
 residency in Canada, because the obstacles to getting into the U.S. are
 too great.
“I am very proud of what I gained here. [But] she does not think it’s
 worth it,” Attaripour-Isfahani says. “In the future, definitely, we 
will have a lot less Iranian doctors, comparing with what we had over 
the last 10 years.”
International medical graduates may 
increasingly gravitate toward programs in Europe, the U.K. and Canada if
 political trends continue, says Dr. Yusuke Tsugawa, a Japanese-trained 
doctor who has studied international medical graduates and is now an 
assistant professor of medicine at the University of California Los 
Angeles’ David Geffen School of Medicine. “In addition to the actual 
changes that have been made in the last one or two years, I think 
there’s some concerns about uncertainty around what’s going to happen in
 the future,” Tsugawa says. “They don’t want to come to the U.S. to 
start their training and get kicked out during the training, because 
that would be devastating for their careers.”
That uncertainty 
could have repercussions for patients, since foreign-born physicians 
occupy a pivotal place in the U.S. health care system. About an eighth 
of the resident workforce was born in a foreign country. With the 
American College of Physicians already projecting a shortage
 of between 40,800 and 105,000 doctors by 2030, any drop in the number 
of physicians who choose to practice in the U.S. could have significant 
effects.
Underserved areas may be the hardest hit. Studies have shown
 that international medical graduates are more likely to practice in 
inner cities and rural communities, and to enter essential practice 
areas such as primary care and family medicine — two fields U.S. grads 
are increasingly eschewing in favor of high-paying specialties like 
surgery and dermatology. Because of that trend, “Just training more 
doctors in the current system in the United States will overcompensate 
for specialists, and under-compensate for primary care docs,” says Dr. 
G. Richard Olds, president of St. George’s University in Grenada, a 
leading provider of foreign-trained U.S. doctors. International medical 
graduates “play a very important role, because we have had an 
insufficient number of U.S.-trained doctors for some time.”
There’s
 also evidence that international medical graduates provide care that is
 just as good, if not better, than that of domestically schooled 
doctors. A 2017 study
 by Tsugawa found that patients treated by international medical 
graduates had slightly lower 30-day mortality rates than people at the 
same hospital who were treated by U.S.-trained physicians. The two 
groups also had similar rates of hospital readmission, a metric often 
used to quantify quality of care. These results underscore the talent of
 international medical graduates, Tsugawa says.
“I don’t think the
 quality of the U.S. medical schools are worse than the quality of that 
in foreign countries,” Tsugawa says. “I think what explains it better is
 that the selection criteria for foreign medical graduates in the U.S. 
is pretty rigorous.” The residency match rate for Americans this year 
was 94%, meaning the vast majority of American students on track to 
graduate from U.S. medical schools were accepted to a training program. 
Only 56% of non-U.S.-citizen international medical graduates, by 
contrast, matched with a residency program this year.
Dr. Anupam Jena, a professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical
 School, agrees that the quality of international medical graduate care 
tends to be high. “We’re attracting the best and the brightest from all 
over the world,” he says. “Not surprisingly, the best and the brightest 
from India or China or Russia or wherever are probably going to be 
pretty good.”
Still, it can be difficult and costly to secure 
visas for foreign clinicians. That’s especially daunting for small, 
community-hospital-based residency programs — the type that tend to 
produce critically needed primary care physicians and doctors who end up
 practicing in underserved areas. “If you have a program with 15 
first-year residents and one or two don’t show up, it could be 
devastating for the program,” ECFMG’s Pinsky says. As a result, small 
hospitals may simply not take the risk, leaving international medical 
graduates who don’t make the cut for the most selective programs in the 
lurch.
Some schools that did take the risk may be punished this 
year, given the current situation with H-1B visas. The letter sent to 
the USCIS by various medical groups notes that, for “at least one 
internal medicine training program,” 60% of incoming residents are on, 
or are supposed to be on, H-1B visas.
“I don’t even want to know 
what’s going to happen if [programs like that] have to start without 
having any of those people working,” Daniel, the medical resident, says.
 “That is really going to affect patient care.”

 
 
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário