Coyle A. A Decade of Teaching and Learning in Internal Medicine Ambulatory Education: A Scoping Review.
J Grad Med Educ 2019;
11:132-142. [PMID:
31024643 PMCID:
PMC6476084 DOI:
10.4300/jgme-d-18-00596.1]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2018] [Revised: 11/20/2018] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Ambulatory training in internal medicine residency programs has historically been considered less robust than inpatient-focused training, which prompted a 2009 revision of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Program Requirements in Internal Medicine. This revision was intended to create a balance between inpatient and outpatient training standards and to spur innovation in the ambulatory setting.
OBJECTIVE
We explored innovations in ambulatory education in internal medicine residency programs since the 2009 revision of the ACGME Program Requirements in Internal Medicine.
METHODS
The authors conducted a scoping review of the literature from 2008 to 2017, searching PubMed, ERIC, and Scopus databases. Articles related to improving educational quality of ambulatory components of US-based internal medicine residency programs were eligible for inclusion. Articles were screened for relevance and theme categorization and then divided into 6 themes: clinic redesign, curriculum development, evaluating resident practice/performance, teaching methods, program evaluation, and faculty development. Once a theme was assigned, data extraction and quality assessment using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score were completed.
RESULTS
A total of 967 potentially relevant articles were discovered; of those, 182 were deemed relevant and underwent full review. Most articles fell into curriculum development and clinic redesign themes. The majority of included studies were from a single institution, used nonstandardized tools, and assessed outcomes at the satisfaction or knowledge/attitude/skills levels. Few studies showed behavioral changes or patient-level outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
While a rich diversity of educational innovations have occurred since the 2009 revision of the ACGME Program Requirements in Internal Medicine, there is a significant need for multi-institution studies and higher-level assessment.
Collapse