Occupational medicine physicians in the United States: demographics and core competencies

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the demographic profile and opinions of current occupational medicine (OM) physicians on the importance of specific core competencies. METHODS: A random sample of 1500 OM physicians listed in the membership directory of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) were asked to complete a voluntary survey. RESULTS: Six hundred and ten OM physicians completed the survey. Fifty two percent worked in clinical settings, and 16% worked in corporate or industrial settings. Eighty percent were satisfied with their choice of careers. CONCLUSIONS: OM physicians appeared to be highly trained, with 60% certified in OM and 68% board certified in other specialties. The OM physicians valued staying current in the field, understanding the relationship between occupational exposure and health, and communicating with stakeholders most highly. Occupational physicians are an important source of knowledge regarding what competencies and core knowledge areas are important for OM practice.     

Influence of residency training on occupational medicine practice patterns

OBJECTIVES: A relatively high proportion of occupational medicine (OM) specialists have not had formal residency training in OM. Members of the Western Occupational and Environmental Medicine Association, a professional organization of OM specialists, completed a postal questionnaire (160 of 561 members). METHODS: Educational background, practice setting, practice activities, and skills considered relevant were compared between those with and without formal training. RESULTS: Both groups had considerable focus in clinical care, musculoskeletal medicine, and workers' compensation. However, those with formal training practice in a broader variety of settings were less likely to have practiced another specialty, and used additional skills (toxicology, industrial hygiene, and epidemiology) in their practices. Formal education appears to create a greater diversity of skills and opportunities, but it does not appear to create a group of physicians disinterested in "front-line" occupational medicine practice. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the need for formal residency programs but also highlight the importance of access to formal training for midcareer physicians.     

Family Medicine Spokane Rural Training Track: 24 years of rural-based graduate medical education

Twenty percent of the US population lives in rural communities, but only about 9% of the nation's physicians practice in those communities. There is little doubt that the more highly specialized physicians are, the less likely they are to practice or settle in rural areas. There is clearly a population threshold below which it is not feasible for specialist (in contrast to generalist) physicians to pursue the specialty in which they have trained. Much of rural America falls below that threshold. This leaves large geographic areas of America to the primary care physician. The proportional supply of family physicians to specialists increases as urbanization decreases. Family physicians are the largest single source of physicians in rural areas. Family medicine residency programs based in rural locations provide a critical mechanism for addressing rural primary care needs. Graduates from rural residency programs are three times more likely to practice in rural areas than urban residency program graduates. There are two primary goals of training residents in rural areas: producing more physicians who will practice in rural areas and producing physicians who are better prepared for the personal and professional demands of rural practice. Rural Training Tracks, where the first year of residency is completed in an urban setting and the second and third years at a rural site (1-2 model), initially proposed by Family Medicine Spokane in 1985, have been highly successful in placing and maintaining more than 70% of their graduates in rural communities. Similar and modifications of the "Spokane RTT model" have been established around the country. Now, more than 24 years of educational experience has been accumulated and can be applied to further development of these successful family medicine residency programs.     

Practice location as a function of medical school and residency location: implications for resident selection

Numerous studies have documented an association between the state in which a physician practices and prior education in that state. To determine whether this relationship exists for recent family practice residency graduates, 95 randomly selected programs in which residents completed training in 1979 were surveyed to obtain information regarding practice location and medical school location for their graduates. Seventy-nine percent of physicians completing residency and medical school in the same state also practiced in that state. Of those completing residency in a state other than that of their medical school, 43 percent stayed in the state of their residency to practice, and 22 percent returned to the state of their medical school. An analysis of the impact that a policy restricting house staff positions to in-state students would have on physician supply for the state reveals that only about 10 percent more physicians would be expected to start practice in a state if such a policy were implemented.     

Family medicine residency training--three or four years?

Opinions about a four-year family practice residency were elicited from a nationally representative sample of three groups of family physicians. Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 308 residency graduates aged 30 to 35 years, all 383 residency directors, and a random sample of 319 third-year residents. Two mailings produced an 82 percent response rate. A four-year residency was favored by 32 percent of recent graduates, 20 percent of program directors, and 34 percent of third-year residents. Over 60 percent of residents and recent graduates would have entered a family practice program had the residency been of four years' duration. Perceived barriers to a four-year residency included lack of resources, loss of appeal, and the additional time commitment. Respondents were most willing to complete a fourth year of residency to receive additional training in orthopedics, obstetrics, gynecology, and pediatrics. Many respondents believed that the additional year would be helpful in obtaining hospital privileges in obstetrics and in coronary care and intensive care units. This study provides information useful in discussions regarding extending residency training.     

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.     

Obstetric care among family physicians in Pennsylvania. Trends, association with residency training, and policy implications

A study was designed to investigate the status of obstetric practice by Pennsylvania family physicians and its relationship to family practice residency training. A 50% probability sample of all family and general physicians and of all graduates of Pennsylvania family practice residency programs was surveyed by mail. Ten percent of Pennsylvania family physicians and general practitioners reported currently practicing obstetrics, 44% of whom said they planned to stop within 3 years. Telephone survey information from nonresponders suggests that even fewer (5%) of the state's family physicians may actually be practicing obstetrics. Family practice residency training, postresidency obstetric training, and small community size were the best predictors of current obstetric practice. Family physicians in the smallest communities, however, were also those most likely to be planning to stop, and graduates of residency programs were increasingly choosing not to practice obstetrics. Cost of liability insurance and fear of lawsuits were primary reasons cited for stopping obstetrics. Family physicians have been major providers of obstetric care in the nation's rural areas. Now, increasingly firm evidence that fewer family physicians are practicing obstetrics signals increasing shortages in obstetric care for women in rural communities. Changes in the practice climate and obstetric training programs for family physicians seem essential to help reverse these trends.     

首届订单定向医学毕业生就业现状研究

目的:描述分析首届订单定向医学毕业生的就业现状,评价订单定向医学生培养项目实施效果,发现存在的问题并提供相关的政策建议。方法:对中西部4所医学院校的2015届305名订单定向医学毕业生和315名临床五年制医学毕业生进行随访调查。分析其履行合约、参加工作及住院医师规范化培训情况。结果:订单定向毕业生合约履行率99.3%。订单定向毕业生和临床五年制毕业生到乡镇卫生院工作的比例分别为90.7%、2.8%,月平均收入分别为2 011元、2 774元,参加住院医师规范化培训的比例分别是77.8%、43.3%。结论:4所医学院校首届订单定向医学毕业生履行合约及参加住院医师规范化培训情况良好,但工作编制和待遇落实较为滞后,订单定向和住院医师规范化培训之间的关系尚未明确。建议在订单定向医学生毕业前,医学院校尽早与地方卫生行政部门和人力资源与社会保障部门协调联系,及早落实医学生的就业工作。同时,在充分协商的基础上,尽快明确订单定向医学生参加住院医师规范化培训的程序和要求。     

Graduates' Reflections on Their Rural Medical Education: The Upper Peninsula Campus Experience

A comprehensive graduate evaluation study was conducted by the Upper Peninsula campus of Michigan State University's College of Human Medicine in 1990. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the effects of the program's philosophy, curriculum, and general operational features on the 56 physician graduates from the program during 1978-1989. All practicing graduates were interviewed in their practice locations and residents were interviewed by telephone. Forty-six percent of the upper peninsula graduates are practicing in primary care specialities (family practice, general pediatrics, general internal medicine) and 41 percent are living in cities of less than 50,000 population. The overall findings identify several factors that were significant to the graduates, such as excellent role models, problem-focused curriculum, and early applied clinical work in an ambulatory, primary care, rural setting. Based on the data, the program attracts students who are satisfied with its innovative medical education.     

Survey of graduates of the Epidemic Intelligence Service as an approach to enhancing ethnic diversity among the nation's epidemiologists.

A survey was conducted to improve the recruitment, training, and retention of epidemiologists in the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) Program of the Centers for Disease Control. The authors compared minority graduates of the program and nonminority graduates in several areas: reasons for application, degree of satisfaction, appropriateness of preparation for epidemiologic practice, and current professional activities. A closed-ended questionnaire was mailed to all 87 minority graduates from the program during the period 1970-88, and to 172 randomly selected nonminority graduates. Of 259 graduates surveyed, 234 or 90.3 percent returned the questionnaire--89.6 percent of minority graduates and 90.7 percent of nonminority graduates. Virtually all graduates were satisfied with their EIS experience (95.2 percent), have encouraged others to apply (96.1 percent), and are the most frequent sources of initial contact of prospective officers (38.2 percent). Most EIS graduates (71.2 percent) were still working in epidemiology. Compared with the nonminority graduates, the minority graduates were more likely to be women and to be single. Minority graduates were less likely than nonminorities to hold academic appointments (44.2 percent versus 60.0 percent) and less likely to work in academic settings as their primary job (11.5 percent versus 18.7 percent). At the same time, minority graduates were more likely to have learned of the EIS Program from academic advisors (32.1 percent versus 19.4 percent). Graduates express high levels of satisfaction with the EIS Program and continue to practice epidemiology following graduation. Few differences between the minority and nonminority graduates were found.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

A National Survey on Pediatric Training and Activities in School Health

National trends in school health practice and training were assessed 10 years after the report of the 1978 American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Pediatric Education. A questionnaire was sent to 2,237 randomly selected AAP Fellows and was returned by 1,068 (48%). Seventy-seven percent of practicing pediatricians reported involvement in some type of school-based or school consultant activity. Those having residency training in school health and those practicing in rural areas were most likely to be involved. The most common types of activity were school-based pre-athletic exams (56%), consultant to special education placement (26%), and game/event physician (23%). Pediatricians were paid for 20% of sports-related school consultation and 25% of nonsports school health activities. Didactic or clinical training in school health was offered during residency to 19%. Specific didactic topics in school health included learning and attention deficit disorders (32%), physician role in health education (15%), and sports medicine (12%). Preathletic participation exams were the most commonly performed school health activity during residency (23%), followed by serving as a school consultant (11%), and attending an individual education plan meeting (7%). Most pediatricians engaged in school health activities. However, they did so without preparation during residency and without payment for their services.     

Hospital privileges for family physicians. Patterns of recent residency graduates, residency director perceptions, and resident expectations

A national mail survey was performed that examined reports of recent residency graduates about hospital privileges for family physicians, perceptions of residency program directors about the percentage of their graduates who obtain privileges, and plans of third-year residents for seeking privileges. Privileges in medicine, pediatrics, surgery, obstetrics, and coronary care/intensive care units (CCU/ICU) were examined. Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 308 residency graduates aged 30 to 35 years, all 383 family practice residency directors, and a random sample of 319 third-year residents. Two mailings produced an 82 percent response rate. Most recent graduates had privileges in medicine (97 percent), pediatrics (95 percent), and CCU/ICU (87 percent). A majority (64 percent) had obstetric privileges, and a minority (36 percent) had surgical privileges. Directors were accurate in their perceptions of privileges attained by graduates in medicine, pediatrics, and CCU/ICU, but underestimated the percentage who had privileges in surgery and overestimated the percentage who had privileges in obstetrics. Residents planned on seeking privileges in medicine, pediatrics, and obstetrics at a rate similar to recent graduates, with lower percentages planning on seeking them in surgery and CCU/ICU. Privileges in surgery and obstetrics were more prevalent in the Midwest and West.     

Long-term outcomes of primary care residency choice by graduating medical students in one medical school

The ratio of primary care physicians to subspecialists is of major importance to the future of American medicine. This study examined the output of primary care physicians by a state-supported medical school that has a goal of placing 50% of its graduates in primary care. Data were obtained from alumni office questionnaires and published board-certification listings for 1102 graduates of the University of Kentucky College of Medicine from 1973 through 1983. Fifty percent of these graduates chose residency training in primary care. Of all 1102 graduates, 37% are categorized as practicing primary care physicians; 29% of the total are board certified in a primary care discipline. Attrition from primary care as an initial career choice at entry into residency was 26%. With declining medical student interest in primary care and a shortage of primary care physicians, new initiatives in medical education and in the practice of medicine are necessary to balance the specialty distribution of physicians more favorably toward primary care.     

Entry of US medical school graduates into family practice residencies: 2002-2003 and 3-year summary

This is the 22nd report prepared by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) on the percentage of each US medical school's graduates entering family practice residency programs. Approximately 10.3% of the 15,810 graduates of US medical schools between July 2001 and June 2002 were first-year family practice residents in 2002, compared with 10.9% in 2001 and 12.8% in 2000. Medical school graduates from publicly funded medical schools were more likely to be first-year family practice residents in October 2002 than were residents from privately funded schools, 12.3% compared with 7.3%. The Mountain and the West North Central regions reported the highest percentage of medical school graduates who were first-year residents in family practice programs in October 2002 at 16.3% and 15.9%, respectively; the Middle Atlantic and New England regions reported the lowest percentages at 6.1% and 5.6%, respectively. Nearly half of the medical school graduates (48.6%) entering a family practice residency program as first-year residents in October 2002 entered a program in the same state where they graduated from medical school. The percentages for each medical school have varied substantially from year to year since the AAFP began reporting this information. This article reports the average percentage for each medical school for the last 3 years. Also reported are the number and percentage of graduates from colleges of osteopathic medicine who entered Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited family practice residency programs, based on estimates provided by the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine.     

Entry of US medical school graduates into family practice residencies: 1999-2000 and 3-year summary

This is the 19th report prepared by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) on the percentage of each US medical school's graduates entering family practice residency programs. Approximately 13.4% of the 16,143 graduates of US medical schools between July 1998 and June 1999 were first-year family practice residents in 1999, compared with 15.4% in 1998 and 16.6% in 1997. Medical school graduates from publicly funded medical schools were almost twice as likely to be first-year family practice residents in October 1999 than were residents from privately funded schools, 16.2% compared with 9.3%. The West North Central region reported the highest percentage of medical school graduates who were first-year residents in family practice programs in October 1999 at 20.6%; the Middle Atlantic and New England regions reported the lowest percentages at 7.7% and 8.0%, respectively. Nearly half of the medical school graduates (48.4%) entering a family practice residency program as first-year residents in October 1999 entered a program in the same state where they graduated from medical school. The percentages for each medical school have varied substantially from year to year since the AAFP began reporting this information. This article reports the average percentage for each medical school for the last 3 years. Also reported are the number and percentage of graduates from colleges of osteopathic medicine who entered Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited family practice residency programs, based on estimates provided by the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine.     

Entry of US medical school graduates into family practice residencies: 2001-2002 and 3-year summary

This is the 21st report prepared by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) on the percentage of each US medical school's graduates entering family practice residency programs. Approximately 10.9% of the 15,900 graduates of US medical schools between July 2000 and June 2001 were first-year family practice residents in 2001, compared with 12.8% in 2000 and 13.4% in 1999. Medical school graduates from publicly funded medical schools were more likely to be first-year family practice residents in October 2001 than were residents from privately funded schools, 12.7% compared with 8.4%. The West North Central region reported the highest percentage of medical school graduates who were first-year residents in family practice programs in October 2001 at 15.2%; the Middle Atlantic and New England regions reported the lowest percentages at 8.0% and 7.2%, respectively. Nearly half of the medical school graduates (48.0%) entering a family practice residency program as first-year residents in October 2001 entered a program in the same state where they graduated from medical school. The percentages for each medical school have varied substantially from year to year since the AAFP began reporting this information. This article reports the average percentage for each medical school for the last 3 years. Also reported are the number and percentage of graduates from colleges of osteopathic medicine who entered Accreditation Councilfor Graduate Medical Education-accreditedfamily practice residency programs, based on estimates provided by the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine.     

Entry of US medical school graduates into family practice residencies: 2000-2001 and 3-year summary

This is the 20th report prepared by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) on the percentage of each US medical school's graduates entering family practice residency programs. Approximately 12.8% of the 15,825 graduates of US medical schools between July 1999 and June 2000 were first-year family practice residents in 2000, compared with 13.4% in 1999 and 15.4% in 1998. Medical school graduates from publicly funded medical schools were almost twice as likely to be first-year family practice residents in October 2000 than were residents from privately funded schools, 15.6% compared with 8.7%. The West North Central region reported the highest percentage of medical school graduates who were first-year residents in family practice programs in October 2000 at 18.2%; the Middle Atlantic and New England regions reported the lowest percentages at 8.3% and 6.8%, respectively. Nearly half of the medical school graduates (47.0%) entering a family practice residency program as first-year residents in October 2000 entered a program in the same state where they graduated from medical school. The percentages for each medical school have varied substantially from year to year since the AAFP began reporting this information. This article reports the average percentage for each medical school for the last 3 years. Also reported are the number and percentage of graduates from colleges of osteopathic medicine who entered Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited family practice residency programs, based on estimates provided by the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine.     

Graded exercise stress test training in family practice and internal medicine residencies

A mail survey of upper Midwest family practice and internal medicine residency program directors was performed to determine the prevalence and characteristics of exercise stress test training. Two mailings provided a 68% response rate for the 184 programs surveyed. Internal medicine programs were significantly more likely to offer exercise stress test training than family practice programs (57% vs 34%). Overall, an estimated 31% of family practice and internal medicine residency graduates are performing exercise stress tests in their practice. Programs provided an average of 7.3 hours of didactic instruction and 32.7 stress tests per resident. A minority (43%) had an established minimum number of exercise stress tests recommended for competency. Programs with and without exercise stress test training did not differ significantly with respect to age, size of program, or size of community. There were some interstate differences in the extent of exercise stress test training provided by family practice residency programs. Internal medicine programs were more likely to require a minimum number of treadmill tests. Otherwise there were few differences between family practice and internal medicine program instruction in exercise stress test training. Family practice program directors were more likely to believe that their residents should be taught this procedure and to include family physicians in their panel of instructors. Specific guidelines should be created to assure adequate stress test training for interested residents.     

Colposcopy practice and training in family practice residency programs.

BACKGROUND: The potential growth of colposcopy as a family medicine procedural skill is directly related to the training currently offered to family practice residents. To define whether these skills are being adequately offered to physicians who want to perform this procedure for their patients, a study was designed to investigate the current status of colposcopy practice and training in family practice residency programs. METHODS: A 16-item survey sent to 356 family practice residency directors in the United States included items concerning colposcopy practice, training, educational programs and strategies, colposcopy coordinator educational background, and colposcopic resource materials and equipment. RESULTS: Surveys were returned from 204 (57 percent) family practice residencies. Colposcopy was performed at 45 percent of the residencies that responded. Ninety-six percent of the respondents who did not perform colposcopy believed colposcopy is a procedure that should be performed by family physicians. Clinical teaching and supervision was the most common method of resident training (74 percent). Colposcopy training coordinators were usually family physicians (72 percent), primarily trained by gynecologists. Assistance with implementing a colposcopy training program was requested by 85 percent of those programs presently not performing colposcopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that there are opportunities for further development of colposcopy practice and training in family practice residencies.