Practice and career outcomes of double-boarded psychiatrists

Dual Residency Training in Neurology and Psychiatry: History and Current Practice

In the early 20th century, neurology training included more experience in psychiatry, and psychiatry training included more training in neurology than what is currently required. After World War I, the increased need for differential diagnosis of what might now be called functional neurological disorders resulted in the military encouraging combined residency training in neurology and psychiatry and the promulgation of the term "neuropsychiatry" for this specialty. Thirty-six percent of physicians certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in its first decade (1935-1945) held certification in both neurology and psychiatry. However, the term neuropsychiatry gradually became used interchangeably with general psychiatry-to distinguish it from psychoanalysis-and lost its specificity. It is widely held that the popularity of psychoanalysis resulted in psychiatrists perceiving less need for neurological knowledge, and inclusion of neurology content in psychiatry training decreased. Dual residency training programs in neurology and psychiatry began to increase in popularity again in the 1980s as advances in neuroscience, neuroimaging, and pharmacology, paired with the growth of behavioral neurology, laid the foundation for meaningful practice of neuropsychiatry. The author surveyed 207 physicians who graduated from both a neurology and psychiatry residency and 18 current trainees in combined neuropsychiatry residency programs to collect information on their current practice, academic activity, and opinions about their training. The response rate was 64%. Respondents' attitudes toward the value of their dual neurology and psychiatry training were overwhelmingly positive. Reasons for the lack of growth of combined residency programs in neurology and psychiatry are examined.

Perceived knowledge of psychiatry and family medicine residents regarding medical management of schizophrenia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia: opportunities to refine the residency training

BACKGROUND

Psychiatry and Family Medicine residents frequently see patients with comorbid mental and physical disorders. Little is known about the difference in knowledge of Psychiatry residents and Family Medicine residents regarding management of common conditions they encounter. This study aimed to assess the knowledge of Psychiatry and Family Medicine residents regarding medical management of schizophrenia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia, as the findings could help to refine the training curriculum for residency training.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was used. Psychiatry and Family Medicine residents pursuing their residency in Singapore were recruited from November 2019 to June 2020. The survey questionnaire consisted of questions which assessed the knowledge regarding medical management of schizophrenia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic data; T-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests to compare the differences between groups; and multiple regression analyses to assess the factors associated with Psychiatry residents' knowledge of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven out of 70 (81.4%) Psychiatry residents and 58 out of 61 (95.1%) Family Medicine residents participated in the study. The majority of Psychiatry residents encountered patients with hypertension (93.0%), diabetes mellitus (87.7%) and dyslipidemia (91.2%) on a daily to weekly basis. Psychiatry residents had higher scores on questions about schizophrenia versus Family Medicine residents (mean 50.70 versus 43.28, p < 0.001). However, Psychiatry residents scored lower on questions about hypertension (mean 33.86 versus 40.98, p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (mean 45.68 versus 49.79, p = 0.005) and dyslipidemia (mean 37.04 versus 44.31, p < 0.001). Receiving undergraduate medical education locally, compared to receiving it overseas, was associated with better knowledge of hypertension (beta = 0.515, p = 0.009) and dyslipidemia (beta = 0.559, p = 0.005); while younger age (26-30 versus > 35 and 31-35 versus > 35) was associated with better knowledge of hypertension (beta = 1.361, p = 0.002 and beta = 1.225, p = 0.003). A significant proportion of Psychiatry residents (61.4%) did not agree that the training provided to manage hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia was adequate. Similarly, majority of Family Medicine residents (62.1%) did not agree that they had adequate training to manage schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

This study raises the awareness of Psychiatry residents' sense of discomfort in managing hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or dyslipidemia and conversely Family Medicine residents in management of schizophrenia, which can be further addressed during the training postings within the residency programs. Future studies are needed to look at local (such as training curriculum) and systemic factors (such as practice trends and culture) in order to better align residency selection criteria and training foci with real world practice factors over time.

Parameters of training, academic involvement, and practice setting predictive of retention in combined medical-psychiatric practice

OBJECTIVE

The authors contrasted physicians trained in both psychiatry and another specialty who continue to practice both specialties vs. those who practice only psychiatry, in terms of their training, academic profile, and practice setting.

METHOD

The authors analyzed survey responses from 132 doubly boarded physicians who vary in whether or not they continue to practice both specialties. Group results were compared using chi square, Fisher exact, and t tests.

RESULTS

Of graduates of double-board programs, 79.2% continue in dual practice. Other factors associated with continued combined practice were training in neurology-psychiatry, greater academic involvement, high motivation, practice in a non-public hospital setting, and demonstrated leadership capacity.

CONCLUSION

Double-board training programs have been successful in producing a group of clinicians committed to long-term combined medical-psychiatric practice, but this effect is stronger in psychiatry-neurology than in other types of combined practice. Future research should investigate other practice parameters that foster or impede integrated medical-psychiatric care.