The AMA Residency Training in Adolescent Preventive Services Project: report of the working group. The American Medical Association.

PURPOSE: To improve resident education in provision of adolescent preventive health care. The American Medical Association (AMA) Residency Training in Adolescent Preventive Services Project Working Group convened to identify specific goals and objectives (G&Os) for pediatric and family medicine resident education in adolescent clinical preventive services and recommend strategies to achieve these G&Os. METHODS: Iterative review process involving members of the working group, nine experienced teaching faculty and 16 resident physicians from family medicine and pediatric training programs, and an advisory board. RESULTS: We achieved consensus on appropriate G&Os for pediatric and family medicine residency education in adolescent clinical preventive services. Faculty and residents expressed concerns about achieving G&Os because of challenges to implementing effective training and evaluation strategies. Suggestions for achieving G&Os included development of an adolescent clinical preventive services curriculum and evaluation program that could be adapted for use in a variety of training program structures. Faculty and residents anticipated the success of a training curriculum would be influenced by: (a) availability of adequate numbers of skilled teaching faculty; (b) availability of time and support for faculty development and teaching efforts; and (c) exposure of residents to adequate numbers of adolescent patients in settings where there are clear expectations for delivery of comprehensive preventive services. CONCLUSIONS: The AMA Residency Training in Adolescent Preventive Services Project Working Group presents G&Os for organizing training experiences in adolescent clinical preventive services in family medicine and pediatric residency training programs and recommends strategies to achieve these G&Os.     

Experiences with a combined residency in internal and preventive medicine

BACKGROUND: The importance of integrating preventive medicine training into other residency programs was reinforced recently by the residency review committee for preventive medicine. Griffin Hospital in Derby CT has offered a 4-year integrated internal medicine and preventive medicine residency program since 1997. This article reports the outcomes of that program. METHODS: Data were collected from surveys of program graduates and the American Boards of Internal and Preventive Medicine in 2005-2007, and analyzed in 2007-2008. Graduates rated the program in regard to job preparation, the ease of transition to employment, the value of skills learned, the perceived quality of board preparation, and the quality of the program overall. Graduates rated themselves on core competencies set by the Accreditation Committee for Graduate Medical Education. RESULTS: Since 1997, the program has enrolled 22 residents. Residents and graduates contribute significantly toward quality of care at the hospital. Graduates take and pass at high rates the boards for both for internal and preventive medicine: 100% took internal medicine boards, 90% of them passed; 63% took preventive medicine boards, 100% of them passed). The program has recruited residents mainly through the match. Graduates rated most elements of the program highly. They felt well-prepared for their postgraduation jobs; most respondents reported routinely using preventive medicine skills learned during residency. Graduates either have gone into academic medicine (31%); public health (14%); clinical fellowships (18%); or primary care (9%); or they combine elements of clinical medicine and public health (28%). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating preventive medicine training into clinical residency programs may be an efficient, viable, and cost-effective way of creating more medical specialists with population-medicine skills.     

A threat to the public health workforce: evidence from trends in preventive medicine certification and training

Evidence of a growing need for preventive medicine specialists is the congruence between needed competencies for practice in the current health care environment, as identified by the Council on Graduate Medical Education (COGME) and in other national reports, and the core competencies of preventive medicine residents. The total number of certified specialists in preventive medicine is 6091. The proportion of self-designated preventive medicine specialists among all U.S. physicians is on the decline and the greatest decline has been among those in public health (PH) and general preventive medicine (GPM). In addition, the total number of preventive medicine residents is on the decline, and the decline has been greatest among those training in PH and combined PH/GPM. One of the reasons for this decline has been inadequate funding due to the absence of Medicare graduate medical education (GME) financing for population-based vs. individual patient care services and meager and diminishing Title VII support. A paucity of faculty is apparent in medical schools with residency training and board certification in preventive medicine. Several actions may help reverse this trend and assure adequate numbers of preventive medicine specialists: expansion of Title VII to increase the number of residents receiving stipends and tuition, adding infrastructure support for faculty development and funding of demonstration projects in distance learning and in joint generalist/ preventive medicine residency training. Medicare GME reform should include recognition of population-based services and inclusion of preventive medicine residencies in provisions for "nonhospital-based" training and in up-weighting methodologies for primary care training. Expansion of Veterans Affairs, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and Department of Defense support is also needed as is attention to resident debt reduction.     

Residency Training in Preventive Medicine

In responding to questionnaires, directors of 37 of the 49 approved residency programs in preventive medicine (excluding aerospace medicine) reported that 285 physicians had entered such training in the academic years, 1960 to 1968. Of these, 92% proceeded into the second year, but only 45% continued into the third. Gainful employment, military service, and residency programs in other specialties were major avenues of loss. The chief difficulty in recruitment appeared to be lack of teaching and indoctrination in preventive medicine during medical school. The greatest monetary difficulties were related to instability of governmental funding and the fact that residents in preventive medicine usually do not fulfill a “service function” in academic settings. A significant number of full-time faculty positions in departments of preventive medicine are vacant. Respondents provided a number of suggestions for improvement.     

Contractual arrangements between residency programs and HMOs.

BACKGROUND. Although one out of seven health maintenance organizations (HMOs) is directly involved in graduate medical education (GME), either as an accredited sponsoring organization or through a contractual agreement with an academic medical center or teaching hospital to serve as an ambulatory rotation site, relatively little is known about the extent to which HMOs have provider contracts with faculty or residents of GME programs. Such provider contracts are not agreements to collaborate on the education of residents, but rather contractual arrangements under which individual physicians or groups (who happen to be residents or faculty) agree to provide services to HMO enrollees in return for some form of compensation. METHODS. In 1990, the Group Health Association of America conducted a survey of a sample of residency training programs in family medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics to ascertain the extent to which (1) residents and faculty of residency training programs are participating physicians in HMOs; and (2) HMO enrollees are serving as the patient base for GME in ambulatory settings. RESULTS. Overall, 42% of the residency program respondents indicated that they contract with HMOs to provide services to enrollees. Nearly two thirds (64%) of family practice programs have provider contracts as compared with 28% of pediatrics programs and 24% of internal medicine programs. Provider contracts with independent practice associations are by far the most common, followed by group, network, and staff model contracts, in that order. CONCLUSIONS. It is apparent that provider contractual arrangements between HMOs and primary care residency programs are quite common, especially in the area of family practice. These contractual arrangements have probably resulted in a more predictable and stable patient revenue base for residency programs. The long-term effects on provider practice styles and the financing of graduate medical education are less clear.     

Who teaches residents about the prevention and treatment of substance use disorders? A national survey.

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate that physicians are poorly prepared to identify and treat tobacco, alcohol, and drug use disorders. Several faculty development programs have been created to increase the number of residency teaching faculty with expertise in this area. There is limited information, however, on those who currently teach residents about these problems and whether there is a need for additional faculty development programs. METHODS: We conducted a 2-stage national survey of faculty who teach residents about substance use problems. First, residency directors from 7 specialties (family medicine, psychiatry, internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and osteopathy) responded to a mailed questionnaire asking them to identify faculty who teach residents about substance use disorders. Second, those identified were contacted and asked to participate in a telephone interview. RESULTS: Of 1293 faculty identified by the residency directors, 769 participated in a research interview. Most of these teachers were full-time physician faculty, men, white, and based in departments of family medicine or psychiatry. Teaching was primarily conducted in hospitals, general outpatient clinics, and classrooms rather than alcohol and drug treatment programs. Less than 10% of the faculty performed clinical work in alcohol and drug treatment programs, and only 19% were certified addiction specialists. The respondents reported a definite need for additional development programs for themselves and other residency teaching faculty. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest a modest increase in the number of faculty who teach residents about substance abuse disorders, and the creation of additional faculty development programs.     

Assessing the need for faculty development in women's health among internal medicine and family practice teaching faculty. The Women's Health Education Working Group (WHEWG)

Women's health education is an emerging interdisciplinary field that has recently received national attention. The American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Academy of Family Practice recently have published competencies in women's health for their residents, with increased attention to gynecological and mental health issues. Increasing women's health in the curricula of internal medicine (IM) and family practice (FP) residents will certainly require faculty development among IM and FP teaching faculty. We report a multiinstitution needs assessment among IM and FP teaching faculty for continuing medical education (CME) in multidisciplinary women's health topics. The survey (n = 100) asked whether faculty desired CME in 30 women's health topics. It also requested rates of referral to specialists for breast and menstrual problems and performance of tests commonly carried out in the care of women (e.g., endometrial biopsy, colposcopy, skin biopsy, and sigmoidoscopy) as measures of possible need for CME. Of the 69 respondents, 37% were IM physicians and 63% were FP physicians. Among the 30 women's health topics listed, breast cancer treatment alternatives, infertility for primary care providers, cervical dysplasia, medical treatment in pregnancy, vulvar disease, indications for pelvic ultrasound/endometrial biopsy, and menstrual disorders were of highest interest. The ranking of desirability of topics by IM and FP faculty correlated by .54 (Spearman rank, df = 28, p < 0.01). Analysis of variance revealed a significantly higher interest overall by IM than FP physicians, 58% vs. 42% (F = 4.1, df = 1, 50, p < 0.05). None of the IM teaching faculty performed endometrial biopsy or colposcopy compared with 57% of FP physicians, and only 12.5% of internists performed skin biopsy and sigmoidoscopy compared with 70% of FP physicians (F = 33, df = 1, 38, p < 0.001). We conclude that faculty development in women's health would benefit resident training in IM and FP, and topics of interest are identifiable. The correlation in interests between the IM and FP teaching faculty might make joint programs successful, although gynecological skills and knowledge clearly are needed more by IM teaching faculty. Obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) faculty could be instrumental in improving women's health education among their IM and FP colleagues.     

Core competencies for preventive medicine residents: Version 2.0

During the early 1990s, the American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM), with support from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), identified core competencies and performance indicators (measures to assess their achievement) for all preventive medicine residents. After the competencies were approved, distributed by the ACPM and HRSA, and published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, they were integrated in various ways into the operation of individual residency programs. Changes in the health care system during the decade, however, necessitated an update of the original competencies to better equip preventive medicine educators to prepare residents for new roles those in preventive medicine can play in a restructured health care system. HRSA funded an effort to produce Version 2.0 of the preventive medicine competencies based on review and refinement of the original competencies through a consensus process. This article includes these revised core competencies and performance indicators.     

Suggested guidelines for pharmacotherapy curricula in family medicine residency training: recommendations from the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Group on Pharmacotherapy

Rational drug use has increasingly received public policy attention in efforts to maintain quality health care at lower costs. Prescribing habits are developed during residency training, and education regarding rational drug use should be an integral part of the residency curricula. Considering that many medical errors in family medicine are related to incorrect medication management, there is need for a focused education in pharmacotherapy. This paper outlines suggested guidelines for pharmacotherapy curricula in family medicine residency training, as recommended by the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Group on Pharmacotherapy. A pharmacotherapy curriculum should include common conditions managed in family medicine, as well as general principles of pharmacotherapy. This should allow for repeated exposure to core topics over a 3-year cycle and be delivered in various settings (didactic teaching, longitudinal active learning, point-of-care education, and rotations). The curriculum should apply and evaluate pharmacotherapy education according to the six core competencies of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Although physician faculty can be responsible for pharmacotherapy education, a clinical pharmacist is uniquely qualified to provide this service. Overall, family medicine residents need comprehensive instruction in pharmacotherapy to develop rational prescribing habits. A structured pharmacotherapy curriculum may assist in achieving this goal and in meeting the ACGME core competencies for residency training.     

The teaching of preventive medicine in American medical schools, 1940–1980

The concept of incorporating prevention into clinical medicine has been addressed by academic medicine since the 1940s. Results reflect the dominant interests of academic medicine over time. This paper reviews this experience, as reflected in national conferences and related activities largely sponsored by the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine, and assesses implications for the 1980s. The consensus of the 1940s was that medical education should focus upon quantitative disciplines. Clinical applicability was considered important, but little was developed. Convening in 1952, deans, clinicians, and preventive medicine faculty strongly recommended teaching clinical prevention in “comprehensive care” programs. This movement was eclipsed by research and specialization. Academic preventive medicine focused on residency training and research, culminating in a major conference in 1963. Epidemiology and biostatistics flourished, while teaching clinical prevention received little attention. By 1970, dominant interest shifted to health services policy and research. Currently, some preventive medicine departments have affiliated with primary care training programs, and policy makers are focusing upon prevention. A number of nationally sponsored curriculum development projects deal with preventive aspects of primary care. Under these circumstances, incorporation of prevention into medical practice seems likely to succeed at the academic level. This may in turn stimulate similar occurrences in the medical care system.     

Current Status of Nutrition Training in Graduate Medical Education From a Survey of Residency Program Directors

Introduction: Nutrition leaders surmised graduate medical nutrition education was not well addressed because most medical and surgical specialties have insufficient resources to teach current nutrition practice. A needs assessment survey was constructed to determine resources and commitment for nutrition education from U.S. graduate medical educators to address this problem. Methods: An online survey of 36 questions was sent to 495 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Program Directors in anesthesia, family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics/gynecology, and general surgery. Demographics, resources, and open‐ended questions were included. There was a 14% response rate (72 programs), consistent with similar studies on the topic. Results: Most (80%) of the program directors responding were from primary care programs, the rest surgical (17%) or anesthesia (3%). Program directors themselves lacked knowledge of nutrition. While some form of nutrition education was provided at 78% of programs, only 26% had a formal curriculum and physicians served as faculty at only 53%. Sixteen programs had no identifiable expert in nutrition and 10 programs stated that no nutrition training was provided. Training was variable, ranging from an hour of lecture to a month‐long rotation. Seventy‐seven percent of program directors stated that the required educational goals in nutrition were not met. The majority felt an advanced course in clinical nutrition should be required of residents now or in the future. Conclusions: Nutrition education in current graduate medical education is poor. Most programs lack the expertise or time commitment to teach a formal course but recognize the need to meet educational requirements. A broad‐based, diverse universal program is needed for training in nutrition during residency.     

Teaching skills improvement programmes in US internal medicine residencies†

Summary. The prevalence and nature of resident teaching skills improvement programmes (TSIP) are unknown. Although residents perceive themselves as important teachers of students, there is little information on how programme directors (PDs) view residents as teachers. A comprehensive questionnaire was sent to all 428 US internal medicine PDs in December 1990, of which 60% (n= 259 ) responded. Of the 259 responding programmes, only 20% (n= 51 ) had TSIPs. Characteristics of TSIPs were not uniform. Mean instructional time was 9 hours (range, 1–24 hours). The teacher most frequently utilized to develop and facilitate the TSIP was the PD. PDs from residencies with a TSIP indicated more strongly than PDs without a TSIP that residents contributed to students' learning. Fifty-one per cent of TSIPs required residents to attend. Evaluation/feedback as a teaching method was the most common topic covered in TSIPs. Long-term assessment of teaching skills after programme participation was done in 15% of TSIPs. Although PDs value the resident's role as teacher, current TSIPs in internal medicine residencies are few in number and lack standardization. PDs' attitudes probably influence whether residents are taught teaching skills and whether teaching skills are evaluated. Further investigation of appropiate curriculum for TSIPs and assessment of long-term effectiveness of TSIPs are needed.     

Bronchial Epithelial Mucin in Rats Infected With Mycoplasma pulmonis

After 80 years, US training for clinical specialties is essentially hospital-based supervised practice. Needs for specialists are barely met, particularly since one third of residents are foreign citizens. Training must be more efficient, shorter, and relevant to community practice. Numbers of trainees in preventive medicine are entirely inadequate. Residencies have grown rapidly, but comprise only 1% of programs and positions. Younger physicians are recruited through community impact on health care, students, and teachers. These preventive medicine residents function outside hospitals, work fewer hours, are paid more than clinical residents, and obtain an academic year’s graduate education. They work fewer hours, but receive less pay than clinicians. The nation must examine the concept of training physicians for nonclinical preventive medicine functions and, if training continues, must develop methods of making training and career more attractive.     

Defining Competencies and Performance Indicators for Physicians in Medical Management

The recent and profound changes in the American health care delivery system have created a need for physicians who are trained and willing to assume a high level of responsibility for managing evolving health care organizations. Yet most physicians receive no formal training in medical administration and management because changes in medical school and residency education have lagged behind changes in clinical practice and reimbursement. To avoid haphazard approaches and unnecessary duplication of resources, it is important for physicians involved in managerial medicine to collectively identify competencies in this area needed in the marketplace. The American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM), with funding from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), undertook an effort to identify competencies essential for physicians who will fill leadership roles in medical management. Like ACPM’s earlier effort to develop core competencies in preventive medicine, this project drew upon the theoretical model of competency-based education. This article describes the strategy we followed in reaching consensus among a diverse group of physician executives and preventive medicine residency program directors, and includes the list of medical management competencies and performance indicators developed. Recurrent issues that can sidetrack competency development projects are also presented as well as suggestions for overcoming them. The competencies can serve as a framework for expanding current core preventive medicine training in management and administration and for developing new training programs to equip physicians with the special expertise they will need to provide management leadership within the changing landscape of health care delivery.     

Preventive medicine residents: a national survey.

Little is known about those physicians who pursue graduate medical education in preventive medicine, including aerospace medicine, general preventive medicine and public health, and occupational medicine. We surveyed resident physicians about their academic background, financial environment, clinical activities, and professional goals. A total of 147 residents (30%) responded from a population of 498 residents. The data suggest a lack of available information about preventive medicine training and careers among medical students who subsequently pursue such training. Their economic environment is extremely diverse, with a wide range of salary, "moonlighting" hours, educational loans, and service obligations. Although the median annual salary ($24,700) is similar to the national average resident salary, 32% of respondents earned less than $20,000, and 95% have educational debts averaging $30,900. Sixty-two percent of respondents perform clinical work in their residency, whereas 76% desire future clinical work as part of their practice. This gap is most pronounced in general preventive medicine and public health. The residents express a wide range of interests in future practice of preventive medicine; 54% are interested in government work, and 33% desire academic careers.     

State-Level Education Standards for Substance Use Prevention Programs in Schools: A Systematic Content Analysis

PurposeThree fourths of public schools in the United States maintain instructional programs to discourage alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD) use. State-sanctioned instructional standards attempt to direct this ATOD preventive education. No existing research, however, systematically codes these standards across all grades and states. We performed such an analysis.MethodsWe retrieved ATOD standards information from all 50 states and the District of Columbia from multiple sources, including the National Association of State Boards of Education's State School Health Policy Web site. Three independent researchers classified and cross-validated ATOD standards (inter-rater agreement = 98%) based on recommended content domains and pedagogic delivery methods.ResultsWe find substantial grade-level variation in standards. Elementary schools emphasize generic social skills and affective skills, whereas middle and high school standards focus on knowledge about biological and behavioral consequences of ATOD use. States also vary widely in their content and coverage of standards. Two thirds of states do not include standards in all content areas considered “evidence-based.”ConclusionsThe ATOD curricular agenda for the majority of states falls well below recommended content and delivery benchmarks. We intend for our harmonized data set—the first of its kind—to promote research that examines the relation among state ATOD standards, actual classroom instruction, and adolescent ATOD use.     

A novel training model to address health problems in poor and underserved populations

Health disparities are increasingly common and many U.S. practitioners have informal experience working in resource-poor settings. There are, however, few graduate medical education programs that focus on health equity. A graduate medical education program in health equity was developed at Brigham and Women's Hospital based on a review of existing literature and on a survey of junior faculty who have had informal health disparities experience. The Howard Hiatt Residency in Global Health Equity and Internal Medicine was developed as a four-year program to provide intensive training in internal medicine and health disparities. Participating residents are matched with a mentor who has clinical and research experience in the field of global health. In addition to a series of didactic teaching sessions and longitudinal seminars that focus on issues of global health equity, residents take graduate level courses in epidemiology, health policy, ethics, and medical anthropology. Residents also carry out an independent research project in a geographic area that suffers from health disparities. Two residents are selected for training per year. Participating faculty are multidisciplinary and come from diverse Harvard-affiliated institutions. Graduate medical education in the United States with a focus on health equity is lacking. It is hoped that the novel training program in health equity for internal medical residents developed at Brigham and Women's Hospital can serve as a model for other teaching hospitals based in the United States.     

The Pediatric Residency Training on Tobacco Project: baseline findings from the resident tobacco survey and observed structured clinical examinations

BACKGROUND: Residency training is an ideal time to prepare pediatricians to address tobacco, although few programs provide the necessary training. Barriers to training include competing priorities, lack of resources, and unavailability of expertise. Solutions for Smoking, a hybrid CD-ROM and web site training program for pediatric residents, may enable training directors to overcome these barriers and to include training on tobacco in their curriculum. The Pediatric Residency Training on Tobacco Project is a 4-year randomized prospective study that compares the effectiveness of a special training program, with Solutions for Smoking as the main teaching tool, to a standard training program in 15 pediatric residency-training programs. METHODS: Fifteen pediatric residency-training programs were assigned randomly to special and standard training conditions. Evaluation instruments include baseline and follow-up resident tobacco surveys and observed structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), patient tobacco surveys, and parent or guardian tobacco surveys. RESULTS: The present report describes the Pediatric Residency Training on Tobacco Project, the special and standard training conditions, and Solutions for Smoking, a hybrid CD-ROM and web site training program on tobacco for pediatric residents. Data from the baseline resident tobacco survey and OSCEs also are presented. While residents believed that pediatricians should play a leadership role in tobacco prevention and control, few had formal training in tobacco intervention, most were skeptical about the efficacy of intervention, and they were more likely to ask about tobacco and advise change than to help patients and parents to modify their behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The baseline findings underscore the importance of the proposed research, and the special training program may serve as a useful model for training pediatric residents to address tobacco in the future.