Alumni perspectives comparing a general internal medicine program and a traditional medicine program

Are Army-trained surgeons satisfied with their residencies?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the perceptions of training adequacy among surgeons educated in Army general surgical residencies as a tool for surgical program directors and students considering a military surgical career.

DESIGN

A questionnaire was sent to all general surgeons practicing in the Army during years 1999-2003 (n = 182). In addition to providing basic demographic information, subjects rated their perceptions of training experience in 13 areas on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = somewhat dissatisfied, 3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = somewhat satisfied, 5 = very satisfied). Respondents were split into 3 groups based on graduation year (1968-1992, 1993-1998, 1999-2003) and thereby roughly on status of military obligation at the time of survey. Scores were compared with analysis of variance.

RESULTS

A total of 96 (52.7%) questionnaires were returned, 84 of which were included in this study. The average score for all graduation groups and satisfaction areas was 4.37 +/- 0.91. No differences occurred among the 3 graduation groups in any of the 13 satisfaction areas evaluated, except for pediatric surgery experience, where the most recent graduates rated their satisfaction lower than the other 2 groups (1968-1992, 4.00 +/- 0.61; 1993-1998, 3.96 +/- 1.14; 1999-2003, 3.21 +/- 1.27, p < 0.05). With respect to comparison among the 13 satisfaction areas, several areas of note are present. Satisfaction with training in care for basic surgical problems and the ability to make correct decisions are both higher than 5 other areas (p < 0.01). By contrast, satisfaction with number of cases performed, research training, and pediatric surgery training are lower than at least 3 of the other 12 areas (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Army trained general surgeons, from the most distant to recent graduates, are satisfied with their residencies. Lower satisfaction scores in the areas of number of cases performed, research experience, and pediatric surgery training do, however, highlight aspects for continued research and improvement.

Evaluating and enhancing a women's health curriculum in an internal medicine residency program

OBJECTIVE

Resident education in women's health is required but is often underemphasized. Our aim was to identify women's health topics with the most relevance to our graduates' practices and to determine how well they were prepared to address women's health issues.

DESIGN

Postgraduate survey.

SETTING

University-affiliated internal medicine residency program.

PARTICIPANTS

Program graduates in general internal medicine practice.

METHODS

A survey was drafted listing the 65 topics described in a published residency curriculum in women's health. Respondents indicated the extent to which each item was relevant to their practice and the adequacy of instruction received on a Likert-type scale of 1 (not relevant/inadequate) to 5 (highly relevant/adequate).

RESULTS

The response rate was 86%. Many of the items were highly relevant to our graduates' practices. Learning needs were found in all areas as none of the topics were rated as "adequately" taught during residency. Many areas in the curriculum had low relevance scores. Few differences were seen in the perceived relevance of women's health problems or the adequacy of instruction received based on gender, practice type and setting, or amount of ambulatory training during residency.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of this survey has allowed us to tailor and prioritize learning issues in women's health to meet the needs of our graduates. Increased time in ambulatory rotations alone may not be sufficient to prepare residents to provide comprehensive care in this field. Further study of the effectiveness of a dedicated curriculum in women's heath is needed.

Graduates' perceptions of their clinical competencies in allergy and immunology: results of a survey

PURPOSE

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) have identified six areas of general competency. This study surveyed graduates of allergy and immunology training programs about their perceived clinical competency and the adequacy of their subspecialty training.

METHOD

In August 2000 and May 2001, a questionnaire was mailed to 373 physicians who had completed a fellowship in allergy and immunology in the United States between 1995 and 2001. Physicians were asked to rate the perceived importance and adequacy of their training in, and their level of competency for, 57 general competencies and subspecialty-specific competencies and procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 253 physicians responded (68%). All items in the six ACGME/ABMS general competencies had high ratings (>/= 90%) for perceived importance. One item in the practice-based learning area had low ratings for adequacy of training (57%) and intermediate for competency (75%). Two items in the system-based practice area had low ratings for training (65% and 67%) and intermediate for competency (86% and 88%). Generally, core specialty-specific items (allergic rhinitis, asthma, and urticaria) had high ratings (>/= 90%) for importance, training, and competency. Without exception, items with ratings of less than 70% for adequacy of training also had ratings of less than 90% for competency.

CONCLUSION

The general competencies were considered important, but training in system-based practice and practice-based learning may be deficient. Although self-perceived competency in core areas of allergy and immunology was high, weaknesses in training and self-perceived competency in selected areas were identified.

A comparison of clinical performance of primary care and traditional internal medicine residents

OBJECTIVE

To compare primary care and traditional Internal Medicine residents in their adherence to preventive medicine guidelines, performance in the management of chronic diseases, and utilization of resources.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Urban Internal Medicine residency program.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixteen primary care and 137 traditional Internal Medicine residents who took care of 6,307 patients (a total of 21,002 patient visits in a 1-year period).

MEASUREMENTS

Adherence to preventive medicine guidelines for the screening of breast cancer, cervical cancer, hypercholesterolemia, and colon cancer; admission rates among patients with asthma, chronic pulmonary disease, and diabetes mellitus; four items in the management of diabetes; and resource utilization including the costs for laboratory and radiology tests and number of consultations.

RESULTS

Primary care residents, as compared with traditional residents, adhered to preventive medicine guidelines for a greater proportion of their patients for the following: breast cancer among women aged 52 to 75 years (61% vs. 54%, respectively, P = 0.05); cholesterol screening among patients aged 20 to 64 years (39% vs. 33%, P = 0.007); colon cancer among patients older than 50 years (49% vs. 31%, P = 0.001); and cervical cancer among women aged 20 to 64 years (36% vs. 31%, P = 0.03). There were no differences in hospital admission rates for patients with diabetes or asthma. Total ambulatory care costs for tests, procedures, consults, and office visits were greater for patients of primary care residents ($1,045 vs. $899, P = 0.0001), although total costs per primary care visit were similar between the two patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care residents more closely adhered to preventive medicine guidelines but were similar to traditional residents in their management of chronic diseases. Patients of primary care residents had greater ambulatory care costs that were not entirely attributable to greater adherence to preventive medicine guidelines.

Educational needs of internal medicine residency graduates: general internist versus subspecialists

Residency training is inadequate with respect to the needs of general internal medicine doctors in several areas. We undertook this study to determine the practice habits and educational requirements of general versus subspecialty internists. A survey was mailed to 138 doctors who had completed at least a three-year university-based internal medicine post-graduate training. Sixty-three (46%) responded, of whom 32 completed additional training in a subspecialty of internal medicine. Many (14 of 32) subspecialists described their practice as general internal medicine (GIM) with a subspecialty emphasis. GIM was as important to their practice as it was to the general internists. General internists saw non-internal medicine disciplines as important but subspecialists did not. General internists frequently performed procedures that were not formally taught during training, while subspecialists rarely if ever performed a procedure outside the scope of their fellowship training. Internal medicine training programmes should be able to individualize training based on the career choices of trainees such that training will more fully prepare trainees for practice.

The alumni survey as an instrument for program evaluation in internal medicine

The objective of this analysis was to assess the practical value of the training experience for graduates of U.S. internal medicine residencies. Six alumni surveys were selected for analysis, wherein training items were grouped into comparable categories. Results of the studies were compared, using simultaneous preparation/importance ratings as the basis for assessment of items in each category. Six recent alumni surveys depict internal medicine residency training as a technical experience, wherein basic skills and practice-related issues may be underemphasized. Such surveys are useful for periodic re-evaluation of program goals and outcomes.

Improving the quality and ease of tracking invasive procedures

Documentation of the decision-making process leading up to an outcome of procedures is essential for assessing quality of patient care, supporting reimbursement, determination of appropriate utilization, and discernment of practitioner competence. Currently, doctors document interventions conducted outside the operating room in narratives within the daily progress notes. The free-form narrative typically includes the practitioner directly involved, procedure performed, technique used and outcomes. While hospitals encourage conformity to these documentation standards, the quality and content of the narratives vary greatly by practitioner, frequently leaving significant information missing. Therefore, to improve both quality of documentation in procedure notes and ease of monitoring non-operating room procedures, we developed a multicopy standardized procedure note. The form contains lines for recording the type, location, indication, anaesthesia, findings, and complications of the procedure, plus the persons performing, supervising and undergoing the procedure. Practitioners complete the multicopy note instead of the usual narrative note. We encode all the information from the standardized note into a data base that accumulates information on all procedures done throughout the hospital. The data base is used to generate summary reports to provide feedback to residents, residency directors and practitioners on procedural proficiency. The major advantage of this system is that it simultaneously improves the quality of documentation and ease of tracking non-operating room procedures at our hospitals. In addition, the system collects the information needed for reimbursement coding, hospital quality assurance and utilization review, and practitioner and resident credentialling purposes.

Internal medicine training in ambulatory gynecology

OBJECTIVE

To assess internists' perceptions of their training in the management of common problems in ambulatory gynecology and to compare these perceptions with their clinical practice experiences.

METHODS

We surveyed 325 internists in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area about their residency training and practice experiences in the diagnosis and management of 25 clinical problems in ambulatory gynecology and five nongynecologic problems.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 159 internists (48.5%). Overall, the internists reported relatively little residency training in the management of many common gynecologic disorders. Women internists managed gynecologic problems more than did their male counterparts, independent of the number of women patients in their practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Internal medicine residency programs need to expand training in ambulatory gynecology to better prepare graduates for clinical practice.