The Use of Parenting Electives in Pediatric Residency

BackgroundFinancial considerations and the desire to not prolong training often influence residents’ parental leave length. Some residencies offer parenting electives. These primarily self-directed electives can extend parental time at home, support transition back to work, and allow residents to remain in training and be paid during these transitions.ObjectiveDescribe the prevalence and structure of parenting electives within pediatric residency programs from 3 geographic regions of the Association of Pediatric Program Directors (APPD).MethodsAll 66 pediatric residency program directors in the Western, Mid-America, and Northeastern regions of APPD were invited to participate in a phone interview regarding existence of and structure of their programs’ parenting elective.ResultsThirty-six programs responded (55%). Of those, 24 (67% of responding programs) offer a specific parenting elective and an additional 5 (14%) offer a generic elective that can be tailored to new parents. Curricular elements shared by almost all programs offering specific parenting electives include self-reflective exercises, exploration of a community resource, and parenting articles/book review. Most programs incorporate clinic but not call into these electives.ConclusionParenting electives are increasingly available in pediatric residency programs to support new resident parents. Sharing common curricular elements may help other programs implement and/or enhance this elective offering.     

Global health training in pediatric residency: a qualitative analysis of faculty director insights

ObjectiveInterest and participation in global health (GH) has been growing rapidly among pediatric residents. Residency programs are responding by establishing formal GH programs. We sought to define key insights in GH education from pediatric residency programs with formal GH tracks.MethodsSeven model pediatric residency programs with formal GH training were identified in 2007. Faculty directors representing 6 of these programs participated in expert interviews assessing 6 categories of questions about GH tracks: understanding how GH tracks establish partnerships with global sites; defining organizational and financing structure of GH tracks; describing resident curriculum and pre-trip preparation; describing clinical experiences of residents in GH tracks; defining evaluation of residents and GH tracks; and defining factors that affect development and ongoing implementation of GH tracks. Data were analyzed using qualitative methodology.ResultsAll programs relied on faculty relationships to establish dynamic partnerships with global sites. All programs acknowledged resident burden on GH partners. Strategies to alleviate burden included improving resident supervision and providing varying models of GH curricula and pre-trip preparation, generally based on core residency training competencies. Support and funding for GH programs are minimal and variable. Resident experiences included volunteer patient care, teaching, and research. Commitment of experienced faculty and support from institutional leadership facilitated implementation of GH programs.ConclusionsDirectors of 6 model GH programs within pediatric residencies provided insights that inform others who want to establish successful GH partnerships and resident training that will prepare trainees to meet global child health needs.     

A Proposed Model Curriculum in Global Child Health for Pediatric Residents

ObjectiveIn response to the increasing engagement in global health (GH) among pediatric residents and faculty, academic GH training opportunities are growing rapidly in scale and number. However, consensus to guide residency programs regarding best practice guidelines or model curricula has not been established. We aimed to highlight critical components of well-established GH tracks and develop a model curriculum in GH for pediatric residency programs.MethodsWe identified 43 existing formal GH curricula offered by U.S. pediatric residency programs in April 2011 and selected 8 programs with GH tracks on the basis of our inclusion criteria. A working group composed of the directors of these GH tracks, medical educators, and trainees and faculty with GH experience collaborated to develop a consensus model curriculum, which included GH core topics, learning modalities, and approaches to evaluation within the framework of the competencies for residency education outlined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education.ResultsCommon curricular components among the identified GH tracks included didactics in various topics of global child health, domestic and international field experiences, completion of a scholarly project, and mentorship. The proposed model curriculum identifies strengths of established pediatric GH tracks and uses competency-based learning objectives.ConclusionsThis proposed pediatric GH curriculum based on lessons learned by directors of established GH residency tracks will support residency programs in creating and sustaining successful programs in GH education. The curriculum can be adapted to fit the needs of various programs, depending on their resources and focus areas. Evaluation outcomes need to be standardized so that the impact of this curriculum can be effectively measured.     

The training of pediatric residents in the care of acutely ill and injured children

OBJECTIVES: To describe the current educational experience of pediatric residents in pediatric emergency care, to identify areas of variability between residency programs, and to distinguish areas in need of further improvement. DESIGN: A 63-item survey mailed to all accredited pediatric residency training program directors in the United States and Puerto Rico. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Pediatric residency programs and their directors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary training settings, required and elective rotations related to the care of the acutely ill and injured child, supervision of care, procedural and technical training, and didactic curriculum in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM). RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three (72%) of 213 residency programs responded. One hundred nine (71%) were based at general or university hospitals, the remaining 44 (29%) were based at freestanding children's hospitals. Residents most commonly saw patients in pediatric emergency departments (54%), followed by acute care clinics (21%), general emergency departments (21%), and urgent care clinics (5%). The mean number of weeks of PEM training required was 11, but varied widely from 0 to 36 weeks. Forty programs (27%) required their residents to spend 4 or fewer weeks rotating in an emergency department setting. The best predictor of the number of weeks spent in emergency medicine was residency program size, with small programs requiring fewer weeks (7 weeks for small [1-8 postgraduate year 1 residents] vs 13 for medium [9-17 postgraduate year 1 residents] vs 15 for large [> or =18 postgraduate year 1 residents]). Pediatric surgery (18%), orthopedic (8%), anesthesia (6%), and toxicology (4%) rotations were rarely required. Ninety-two percent of the programs had 24-hour on-site attending physician coverage of the emergency department. Supervising physicians varied widely in their training and included PEM attendings and fellows, general emergency medicine attendings, and general pediatric attendings. Small programs were less likely to have PEM coverage (57% at small vs 95% at large) and more likely to have general emergency medicine coverage (79% at small vs 29% at large). Reported opportunities to perform procedures were uniformly high and did not differ by program size or affiliated fellowship. Residency program directors were uniformly confident in their residents' training in medical resuscitation, critical care, emergency care, airway management, and minor trauma. Thirty-seven percent of all respondents were not confident in their residents' training in major trauma. Most programs reported that they had a didactic PEM curriculum (77%), although the number of hours devoted to the lectures varied substantially. CONCLUSIONS: Wide variability exists in the amount of time devoted to emergency medicine within pediatric residency training curricula and in the training background of attendings used to supervise patient care and resident education. Nevertheless, pediatric residency training programs directors feel confident in their residents training in most topics related to PEM. Residents' training in major trauma resuscitation was the most frequently cited deficiency.     

Look Who's Talking: A Survey of Pediatric Program Directors on Communication Skills Education in Pediatric Residency Programs

ObjectiveTo determine current practices for communication skills curriculum and assessment in pediatric residency programs and to identify programs’ greatest needs regarding communication curricula and assessment.MethodsWe surveyed pediatric residency program directors about their programs’ approach to teaching and assessing residents’ communication skills and how satisfied they were with their curricula and assessment of competence. Respondents were asked about their programs’ greatest needs for teaching and assessing communication skills.ResultsResponse rate was 41% (82/202). Most programs did teach communication skills to residents; only 14% provided no formal training. Programs identified various 1) educational formats for teaching communication skills, 2) curricular content, and 3) assessment methods for determining competence. Many programs were less than satisfied with their curriculum and the accuracy of their assessments. The greatest programmatic need regarding curricula was time, while the greatest need for assessment was a tool.ConclusionsWhile teaching and assessment of communication skills is common in pediatric residency programs, it is inconsistent and variable, and many programs are not satisfied with their current communication training. There is need for development of and access to appropriate and useful curricula as well as a practical tool for assessment which has been evaluated for validity evidence.     

Pediatric Resident Training in the Community Hospital Setting: A Survey of Program Directors

Background and ObjectiveThe role of a hospitalist differs in a community hospital (CH) compared to a university/children's hospital. Residents are required to practice in a variety of relevant clinical settings, but little is known about current trends regarding pediatric resident training in different hospital settings. This study explores CH rotations including their value for resident training, characteristics, benefits, and drawbacks. This study also seeks to define “community hospital.”MethodsAuthors conducted an online cross-sectional survey of pediatric residency program directors distributed by the Association of Pediatric Program Directors. The survey was developed and revised based on review of the literature and iterative input from experts in pediatric resident training and CH medicine. It assessed residency program demographics, availability of CH rotations, value of CH rotations, and their characteristics including benefits and drawbacks.ResultsResponse rate was 56%. CH rotations were required at 24% of residency programs, available as an elective at 46% of programs, and unavailable at 48% of programs. Residency program directors viewed these rotations as valuable for resident training. CH rotations were found to have multiple benefits and drawbacks. Definitions of “community hospital” varied and can be categorized according to positive or negative characteristics.ConclusionsResident rotations at a CH provide valuable learning opportunities with multiple potential benefits that should be weighed against drawbacks in the context of a residency program's curriculum. There are many characteristics that potentially distinguish CH from university/children's hospitals.     

Leadership Training in Pediatric Residency Programs: Identifying Content,Characterizing Practice,and Planning for the Future

ObjectivePhysicians serve as leaders in varying roles, but often with minimal dedicated training. Existing pediatric residency competencies may not completely describe all leadership skills that should be valued. We sought to identify a set of high-value leadership skills and evaluate current training in these skills in pediatric residency programs.MethodsA modified Delphi process was used to inform a national survey of pediatric residency program directors. Programs were asked to rate the perceived importance of identified leadership skills and the presence of dedicated teaching. Skills identified as extremely or quite important by ≥90% of respondents were classified as high-value.ResultsOur modified Delphi process generated 16 core leadership skills to evaluate. A total of 67/204 residency programs responded. Six skills were identified as high-value: managing time effectively, receiving feedback, communicating effectively through speaking, embodying professionalism, demonstrating emotional intelligence, and addressing conflict. Only 19% of responding programs reported providing dedicated teaching time for all high-value skills.ConclusionsDespite a high degree of national agreement among program directors about the importance of specific leadership skills, few pediatric residency programs dedicate time to teaching residents about these skills. The identified high-value leadership skills could help to inform future educational efforts.     

Pediatric Residency Program Handover: Before and After the ACGME Requirement

ObjectiveTo determine what changes occurred in pediatric residency programs with regards to handover education and assessment before and after the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement mandating monitoring safe handover practices in July 2011.MethodsWe sent surveys at 2 time periods to all pediatric program directors in the United States, as identified from a list provided by the Association of Pediatric Program Directors. Respondents were asked about their program demographics, whether they had handover curricula, how trainees were taught to perform handovers, and perceived barriers to effective handover.ResultsResponse rates were 58% in both survey years. After the ACGME requirement, only 1 of 3 of programs reported a handover curriculum with goals, objectives, and assessment tools. There was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of those responding that resident handover education primarily occurred by role modeling (66% vs 82%; P < .05). Other learners (visiting residents, medical students) also continued to learn handover skills by role modeling (55% vs 56%; P = NS). Lack of feedback and interruptions were recognized as barriers to successful handover by program directors in both survey years.ConclusionsThere is a continued need for handover curricula with didactic and practical components as well as assessment pieces within pediatric residency programs. Barriers to effective handover such as lack of feedback and interruptions continue to be major problems. There is a lack of faculty ownership and interest in learner handover that may affect long-term successes. Because role modeling continues to be the main way in which trainees learn handover, specific attention should be given to teach role-modeling techniques.     

Teaching and Assessment of Ethics and Professionalism: A Survey of Pediatric Program Directors

ObjectiveThe Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires residency programs to provide instruction in and evaluation of competency in ethics and professionalism. We examined current practices and policies in ethics and professionalism in pediatric training programs, utilization of newly available resources on these topics, and recent concerns about professional behavior raised by social media.MethodsFrom May to August 2012, members of the Association of Pediatric Program Directors identified as categorical program directors in the APPD database were surveyed regarding ethics and professionalism practices in their programs, including structure of their curricula, methods of trainee assessment, use of nationally available resources, and policies regarding social media.ResultsThe response rate was 61% (122 of 200). Most pediatric programs continue to teach ethics and professionalism in an unstructured manner. Many pediatric program directors are unaware of available ethics and professionalism resources. Although most programs lack rigorous evaluation of trainee competency in ethics and professionalism, 30% (35 of 116) of program directors stated they had not allowed a trainee to graduate or sit for an examination because of unethical or unprofessional conduct. Most programs do not have formal policies regarding social media use by trainees, and expectations vary widely.ConclusionsPediatric training programs are slowly adopting the educational mandates for ethics and professionalism instruction. Resources now exist that can facilitate curriculum development in both traditional content areas such as informed consent and privacy as well as newer content areas such as social media use.     

Resident training in pediatric critical care transport medicine: a survey of pediatric residency programs

OBJECTIVE: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Program Requirement for Pediatrics includes specific objectives that pediatric residents participate in both the pre-hospital care of acutely ill or injured patients and the stabilization and transport of patients to critical care areas. Previously, residents were often included as the physician component for many pediatric critical care transport teams. Subsequent regionalization of transport services and development of nurse-only transport teams prompted us to determine the current level of resident participation in pediatric critical care transport as well as how individual residency programs were meeting the educational objectives. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to each pediatric residency program listed in the 1996-1997 GME Directory. Information was obtained regarding the size of the hospital and the residency program, the presence of a pediatric critical care transport team, the number of annual transports, and transport team leader. In addition, the use of pediatric residents for transports was ascertained, as well as their specific role, training requirements, and method of evaluation. RESULTS: Data were received from 138 programs for a return rate of 65%. Eighty percent of programs offered a pediatric critical care transport service. Nurse-led teams were used for 51% of NICU and 44% of PICU transports. Of the 82 NICU and 84 PICU teams that used residents, the majority used them as team leaders (60% and 70%; respectively) with only the minority requiring that they be at the PL-3 year or greater. The training and/or certification required for resident participation in transports varied among programs, with 85% requiring completion of a NICU or PICU rotation, and 94% requiring NRP or PALS certification. Programs that did not allow resident participation provided exposure to Transport Medicine by various mechanisms, including lectures and emergency department (ED) rotations. CONCLUSION: Pediatric resident participation in critical care transport varies widely among pediatric critical care transport teams. The degree to which residents participate in the transport team would appear to have diminished in comparison to previous studies. Transport teams often use other resources, such as nurses, fellows, or attendings, to lead their transport teams. Pediatric resident exposure to and participation in Transport Medicine varies among programs, as do the methods used to prepare residents for their experience.     

Community pediatrics: a consistent focus in residency training from 2002 to 2005.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in community pediatrics training from 2002 to 2005. METHODS: Pediatric residency program directors were surveyed in 2002 and 2005 to assess resident training experiences in community pediatrics. Program directors reported on the following: provision of training in community settings; inclusion of didactic and practical teaching on community health topics; resident involvement in legislative, advocacy, and community-based research activities; and emphasis placed on specific resources and training during resident recruitment. Cross-sectional and matched-pair analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 168 program directors participated in 2002 (81% response rate), and 161 participated in 2005 (79% response rate). In both years, more than 50% of programs required resident involvement with schools, child care centers, and child protection teams. Compared with 2002, in 2005, more programs included didactic training on legislative advocacy (69% vs 53%, P < .01) and offered a practical experience in this area (53% vs 40%, P < .05). In 2005, program directors reported greater resident involvement in providing legislative testimony (P < .05), and greater emphasis was placed on child advocacy training during resident recruitment (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In the last several years, there has been a consistent focus on legislative activities and child advocacy in pediatric residency programs. These findings suggest a strong perceived value of these activities and should inform efforts to rethink the content of general pediatric residency training in the future.     

Training in community pediatrics: a national survey of program directors.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the spectrum of residency training in community-based settings, assess the extent of resident education on community pediatrics topics, and determine whether educational activities vary by program size or availability of primary care tracks. METHODS: Survey of US pediatric residency program directors from May-September 2002. A 10-item self-administered questionnaire assessed the programs' extent of resident involvement in 15 selected community-based settings and inclusion of didactic or practical education regarding 13 community health topics. RESULTS: Of 168 programs surveyed (81% response rate), 40% were small (< or =30 residents), 35% were medium (31-50 residents), 25% were large (>50 residents), and 15% had primary care tracks. Frequently required community-based settings included schools (69%), child protection teams (62%), day care centers (57%), and home visiting (48%). Of 15 community-based settings, 28% required involvement in fewer than 4, 41% required involvement in 4-6, and 31% required involvement in 7 or more. More than two-thirds offered didactic teaching and practical experience on issues related to managed care, cultural competency, and the mental health and social service systems. There were no differences in the number of required community-based settings by program size or presence of primary care tracks. CONCLUSIONS: Most pediatric residency programs require exposure to community-based settings and provide education on various community health topics. Ongoing challenges include continued implementation amid work duty hour limitations, best practice models for practical implementation of community-based experience into residency training, and the impact of such training on future involvement in the community and physician practice.     

Integrating Mental Health Services in Primary Care Continuity Clinics: A National CORNET Study

ObjectiveTo determine whether pediatric continuity clinics integrate mental health (MH) services into care delivery; and to determine whether the level of MH integration is related to access to MH services, types of MH screening performed, self-efficacy, satisfaction with referral sites, and communication with the primary care provider.MethodsPediatric Residency Integrated Survey of Mental Health in Primary Care (PRISM_PC) is a newly designed cross-sectional, Web-based survey of continuity clinic directors participating in a national network of pediatric continuity clinics (CORNET). Definitions of MH models included integrated or nonintegrated MH models or traditional care. The survey included questions regarding access, screening that was performed at sites, comfort with MH management as well as provider satisfaction and communication with referral sites.ResultsSeventy-eight percent (57 of 73) of CORNET site directors responded, representing input from 30% of US pediatric residency continuity programs. Thirty-five percent (n = 20) reported an integrated MH model while 65% (n = 37) reported a nonintegrated MH model. Seventy-nine percent screened for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, 44% for behavioral-emotional issues, and 19% for pediatric depression. No differences were found in terms of screening or tools used on the basis of the level of MH integration. Those with integrated programs were more likely to have access to an on-site psychologist (P = .001) or psychiatrist (P = .006).ConclusionsDirectors from one-third of training programs surveyed reported some level of MH integration in their primary care teaching clinics. Future studies are needed to compare patient and resident education outcomes between integrated and nonintegrated sites.     

Pediatric Chief Resident Exchange Program—A Novel Method to Share Educational Ideas Across Training Programs

BackgroundPediatric residency programs offer many conferences and activities to meet the educational needs of their residents. We developed and assessed the Pediatric Chief Resident Exchange Program where pediatric chief residents visited another institution for a day with the goal of sharing educational and curricular innovations between residency programs in an experiential manner.Approach/InnovationPediatric chief residents participated in various activities during the exchange including educational conferences and discussions with residency program leadership at the host institutions. Surveys were administered to all participating chiefs to determine if any changes to educational conferences or curriculum were made or planned to be made at their home program based upon what they observed at the other institution and to have chiefs reflect on what they gained from the experience.ResultsTwenty-eight chief residents from 9 programs participated in the exchange program over 3 academic years (2015–2018). All respondents felt the exchange experience was worthwhile. The majority (67%) of programs planned to implement a change at their institution based on participation in the exchange with over half actually making a change by the end of the academic year. Participating chiefs gained a sense of camaraderie, appreciated that other programs experienced similar struggles, and developed further insight into the chief resident role.DiscussionThe Pediatric Chief Resident Exchange Program is a novel method of sharing educational practices between institutions that can lead to curricular changes at participating programs. It can also be an opportunity for chief resident professional development.     

Pediatric radiologist-driven didactics for a pediatric residency program: a quality initiative

Background

Pediatric residents exhibit knowledge gaps in appropriateness of imaging utilization.

Objective

This study evaluates the value of radiologist-driven imaging education in a pediatric residency program. The primary goals of this educational program were to provide pediatric residents with resources such as the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria, support optimal resource utilization and patient care, increase resident understanding of radiation risk, and determine the value of integrating radiologists into pediatric education.

Materials and methods

A needs assessment was performed in which the chief residents of a large pediatric program were surveyed. The consensus of chief residents was that a four-part lecture series delivered by a pediatric radiology fellow would be beneficial to the pediatric residents. Topics included general radiation risk as well as basic imaging topics in the chest, abdomen, neurological system, extremities and vasculature. Each lecture integrated appropriate ordering, ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable)/Image Gently, and basic image interpretation. Residents were asked, using a Likert scale, to rate their understanding of radiation risk, the ACR Appropriateness Criteria, and other topics of interest before and after each lecture. Pediatric residents were given a 10-item quiz before and after the lecture series to assess their knowledge regarding the best test to order in clinical scenarios.

Results

The average pre-lecture score for knowledge of radiation risk was 3.27 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.02–3.51) out of 5, which improved to 4.27 (95% CI: 4.09–4.57) post-lecture. There was an increase in understanding of ACR appropriateness, with pre-lecture rating of knowledge increasing from 1.91 (95% CI 1.54–2.29) out of 5 to 3.61 (95% CI 3.33–3.90) post-lecture. The residents averaged 82.7% (95% CI 77.3%–88.1%) on the appropriateness pre-test and 93.8% (95% CI 90.3%–97.2%) on the post-test. Residents provided positive feedback upon conclusion of the program and reported a beneficial effect on their education.

Conclusion

A radiologist-driven lecture series in a pediatric residency can improve resident understanding of appropriate ordering practices and radiation risk. Radiologist participation in pediatric residency training is well-received.

     

International child health electives for pediatric residents

BACKGROUND: International child health (ICH) electives can strengthen the skills and shape the values of pediatric residents. Much can be learned from the literature on ICH electives during medical school. Yet there is little published information regarding ICH electives during residency, nor do educational guidelines for such electives exist. OBJECTIVES: To describe existing ICH electives among pediatric residency programs and to develop guidelines for ICH electives during residency training. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A survey of 248 pediatric residency programs in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico was conducted in November 1995. Consensus guidelines were developed by the executive committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Section on International Child Health. Consensus was achieved via full agreement among the 11 committee members. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 65%. International child health electives were offered by 25% of respondents. Most had no formal educational structure. An additional 42% of respondents indicated interest in ICH electives and requested more information. The AAP consensus guidelines for ICH electives focus on 4 principles: prerequisites, preceptorship, preparation, and evaluation. The guidelines are based on a conceptual framework that emphasizes reciprocity and continuity. CONCLUSIONS: While only 25% of pediatric residency programs currently offer ICH electives, many more express an interest in doing so. Educational structure for such electives is important and lacking. The AAP consensus guidelines provide a template for meaningful ICH experiences during pediatric residency. These guidelines may be applicable to other specialties as well.