Comprehensive ambulatory medicine training for categorical internal medicine residents

It is challenging to create an educational and satisfying experience in the outpatient setting. We developed a 3-year ambulatory curriculum that addresses the special needs of our categorical medicine residents with distinct learning objectives for each year of training and clinical experiences and didactic sessions to meet these goals. All PGY1 residents spend 1 month on a general medicine ambulatory care rotation. PGY2 residents spend 3 months on an ambulatory block focusing on 8 core medicine subspecialties. Third-year residents spend 2 months on an advanced ambulatory rotation. The curriculum was started in July 2000 and has been highly regarded by the house staff, with statistically significant improvements in the PGY2 and PGY3 evaluation scores. By enhancing outpatient clinical teaching and didactics with an emphasis on the specific needs of our residents, we have been able to reframe the thinking and attitudes of a group of inpatient-oriented residents.     

Brief report: Multiprogram evaluation of reading habits of primary care internal medicine residents on ambulatory rotations

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reading habits and educational resources of primary care internal medicine residents for their ambulatory medicine education. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multiprogram survey of primary care internal medicine residents. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Second- and third-year residents on ambulatory care rotations at 9 primary care medicine programs (124 eligible residents; 71% response rate). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants were asked open-ended and 5-point Likert-scaled questions about reading habits: time spent reading, preferred resources, and motivating and inhibiting factors. Participants reported reading medical topics for a mean of 4.3+/-3.0 SD hours weekly. Online-only sources were the most frequently utilized medical resource (mean Likert response 4.16+/-0.87). Respondents most commonly cited specific patients' cases (4.38+/-0.65) and preparation for talks (4.08+/-0.89) as motivating factors, and family responsibilities (3.99+/-0.65) and lack of motivation (3.93+/-0.81) as inhibiting factors. CONCLUSIONS: To stimulate residents' reading, residency programs should encourage patient- and case-based learning; require teaching assignments; and provide easy access to online curricula.     

Trends in market demand for internal medicine 1999 to 2004

BACKGROUND: The health care marketplace has changed substantially since the last assessment of demand for internal medicine physicians in 1996. METHODS: We reviewed internal medicine employment advertisements published in 4 major medical journals between 1996 and 2004. The number of positions, specialty, and other practice characteristics (e.g., location) were collected from each advertisement. RESULTS: Four thousand two hundred twenty-four advertisements posted 4,992 positions. Of these positions, jobs in the Northeast (31% of positions) or single specialty groups (36.8% of positions) were most common. The relative proportion of advertisements for nephrologists declined (P < .001), while the relative proportions of advertisements for critical care specialists (0.5% in 1996 to 1.7% in 2004, P = .004) and hospitalists (1.0% in 1996 to 12.1% in 2004, P < .001) increased. Advertisements for outpatient-based generalist positions (i.e., Primary Care and Internal Medicine) declined (-2.7% relative annual change, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -4.1%, -1.2%) between 1996 and 2004, a decrease largely due to a substantial decline in advertisements noted between 1996 and 1998. However, over the entire time period, the combined proportion of advertisements for all generalists (hospitalists and outpatient-based generalists) did not change (0.5% relative annual change, 95% CI -0.8% to 2.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Since 1996, demand for the majority of medical subspecialties has remained constant while relative demand has decreased for primary care and increased for hospitalists and critical care. Increase in demand for generalist-trained hospitalists appears to have offset falling demand for outpatient generalists.     

A national survey on the current status of general internal medicine residency education in geriatric medicine

OBJECTIVES: The dramatic increase in the U.S. elderly population expected over the coming decades will place a heavy strain on the current health care system. General internal medicine (GIM) residents need to be prepared to take care of this population. In this study, we document the current and future trends in geriatric education in GIM residency programs. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: An original survey was mailed to all the GIM residency directors in the United States (N = 390). RESULTS: A 53% response rate was achieved (n = 206). Ninety-three percent of GIM residencies had a required geriatrics curriculum. Seventy one percent of the programs required 13 to 36 half days of geriatric medicine clinical training during the 3-year residency, and 29% required 12 half days or less of clinical training. Nursing homes, outpatient geriatric assessment centers, and nongeriatric ambulatory settings were the predominant training sites for geriatrics in GIM. Training was most often offered in a block format. The average number of physician faculty available to teach geriatrics was 6.4 per program (2.8 full-time equivalents). Conflicting time demands with other curricula was ranked as the most significant barrier to geriatric education. CONCLUSIONS: A required geriatric medicine curriculum is now included in most GIM residency programs. Variability in the amount of time devoted to geriatrics exists across GIM residencies. Residents in some programs spend very little time in specific, required geriatric medicine clinical experiences. The results of this survey can guide the development of future curricular content and structure. Emphasizing geriatrics in GIM residencies helps ensure that these residents are equipped to care for the expanding aging population.     

Evidence-based medicine training in internal medicine residency programs

To characterize evidence-based medicine (EBM) curricula in internal medicine residency programs, a written survey was mailed to 417 program directors of U.S. internal medicine residency programs. For programs offering a freestanding (dedicated curricular time) EBM curriculum, the survey inquired about its objectives, format, curricular time, attendance, faculty development, resources, and evaluation. All directors responded to questions regarding integrating EBM teaching into established educational venues. Of 417 program directors, 269 (65%) responded. Of these 269 programs, 99 (37%) offered a freestanding EBM curriculum. Among these, the most common objectives were performing critical appraisal (78%), searching for evidence (53%), posing a focused question (44%), and applying the evidence in decision making (35%). Although 97% of the programs provided medline, only 33% provided Best Evidence or the Cochrane Library. Evaluation was performed in 37% of the freestanding curricula. Considering all respondents, most programs reported efforts to integrate EBM teaching into established venues, including attending rounds (84%), resident report (82%), continuity clinic (76%), bedside rounds (68%), and emergency department (35%). However, only 51% to 64% of the programs provided on-site electronic information and 31% to 45% provided site-specific faculty development. One third of the training programs reported offering freestanding EBM curricula, which commonly targeted important EBM skills, utilized the residents’ experiences, and employed an interactive format. Less than one half of the curricula however, included curriculum evaluation, and many failed to provide important medical information sources. Most programs reported efforts to integrate EBM teaching, but many of these attempts lacked important structural elements.     

General medicine advanced training: lessons from the John Hunter training programme

Recent years have seen a rapid growth in the number of advanced trainees pursuing general medicine as a specialty. This reflects an awareness of the need for broader training experiences to equip future consultant physicians with the skills to manage the healthcare challenges arising from the demographic trends of ageing and increasing comorbidity. The John Hunter Hospital training programme in general medicine has several characteristics that have led to the success in producing general physicians prepared for these challenges. These include support from a core group of committed general physicians, an appropriate and sustainable funding model, flexibility with a focus on genuine training and developing awareness of a systems approach, and strong links with rural practice.     

Internal medicine training in ambulatory gynecology

Objective:To assess internists’ perceptions of their training in the management of common problems in ambulatory gynecology and to compare these perceptions with their clinical practice experiences. Methods:We surveyed 325 internists in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area about their residency training and practice experiences in the diagnosis and management of 25 clinical problems in ambulatory gynecology and five nongynecologic problems. Results:Responses were received from 159 internists (48.5%). Overall, the internists reported relatively little residency training in the management of many common gynecologic disorders. Women internists managed gynecologic problems more than did their male counterparts, independent of the number of women patients in their practices. Conclusions:Internal medicine residency programs need to expand training in ambulatory gynecology to better prepare graduates for clinical practice. Received from the Division of General Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, Oregon. Supported in part by DHHS #5 D28 PE 10061-01.     

How is geriatrics different from general internal medicine?

Geriatrics and general internal medicine overlap greatly: most sick patients seen by a generalist are elderly and geriatricians care for nearly the full spectrum of diseases seen in internal medicine. Differences between the two disciplines can be seen in the areas of patient care, research and administration. As a group, geriatric patients are different from young adults because they are more likely to have multiple chronic illnesses, to depend on others, to be frail and to die in the near future. Each of these characteristics requires special knowledge on the part of the physician. The research agenda in geriatrics extends from attempts to find the molecular basis of sarcopenia and frailty to clinical research on the support of caregivers, who are themselves critically important to patients. In the US, nursing homes are required to have medical directors; this position is largely administrative and requires a distinct set of knowledge and attitudes. Clinical care, research and administrative efforts must all respond to the enormous number of patients who will develop cognitive impairment over the next three decades. Because the number of elderly patients so far exceeds the ability of geriatricians to provide care, education and 'geriatricizing' other specialties will also be an important mission for geriatricians. Proper reimbursement presents a serious challenge to physicians who care for the frail elderly. If geriatricians take care of the frailest, sickest and most vulnerable patients, but reimbursement mechanisms cannot recognize this fact, then all geriatricians will soon go bankrupt.     

Evidence-based medicine knowledge,attitudes, and skills of community faculty

CONTEXT: As medical schools turn to community physicians for ambulatory care teaching, assessing the preparation of these faculty in principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) becomes important. OBJECTIVE: To determine the knowledge and attitudes of community faculty concerning EBM and their use of EBM in patient care and teaching. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted from January to March of 2000. SETTING: A clinical campus of a state medical school; a midwestern city of a half-million people with demographics close to national means. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparisons of community faculty with full-time faculty in perceived importance and understanding of EBM (5-point scale), knowledge of EBM, and use of EBM in patient care and teaching. MAIN RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 63% (177) of eligible community faculty and 71% (22) of full-time faculty. Community faculty considered EBM skills to be less important for daily practice than did full-time faculty (3.1 vs 4.0; P < .01). Primary care community faculty were less confident of their EBM knowledge than were subspecialty community or full-time faculty (2.9 vs 3.3 vs 3.6; P < .01). Objective measures of EBM knowledge showed primary care and subspecialty community faculty about equal and significantly below full-time faculty (P < .01). Thirty-three percent of community faculty versus 5% of full-time faculty do not incorporate EBM principles into their teaching (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Community faculty are not as equipped or motivated to incorporate EBM into their clinical teaching as are full-time faculty. Faculty development programs for community faculty should feature how to use and teach basic EBM concepts.     

Contributions of general internal medicine teaching units

OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe general internal medicine teaching units and their educational activities. DESIGN: A cross-sectional mailed survey of heads of general internal medicine teaching units affiliated with U.S. internal medicine training programs who responded between December 1996 and December 1997. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Responses were received from 249 (61%) of 409 eligible programs. Responding and nonresponding programs were similar in terms of university affiliation, geographic region, and size of residency program. Fifty percent of faculty received no funding from teaching units, 37% received full-time (50% or more time), and 13% received part-time (under 50% time) funding from units. Only 23% of faculty were primarily located at universities or medical schools. The majority of faculty were classified as clinicians (15% or less time spent in teaching) or clinician-educators (more than 15% time spent in teaching), and few were clinician-researchers (30% or more time spent in research). Thirty-six percent of faculty were internal medicine subspecialists. All units were involved in training internal medicine residents and medical students, and 21% trained fellows of various types. Half of the units had teaching clinics located in underserved areas, and one fourth had teaching clinics serving more than 50% managed care patients. Heads of teaching units reported that 54% of recent graduating residents chose careers in general internal medicine. CONCLUSIONS: General internal medicine teaching units surveyed contributed substantial faculty effort, much of it unfunded and located off-campus, to training medical students, residents, and fellows. A majority of their graduating residents chose generalist careers. Presented at the national meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, April 1998, and the Bureau of Health Professions, June 1998. This work was supported by the Division of Medicine, Bureau of Health Professions, Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Md, grant 103HR960470P000-000; and the Society of General Internal Medicine.     

Mentorship in academic general internal medicine

BACKGROUND: Effective mentorship is crucial to career development. Strategies to improve the availability of mentors include mentoring multiple mentees at once, compensating mentors, comentoring, and long-distance mentoring. OBJECTIVE: To describe current trends in mentorship in general Internal Medicine (GIM). METHODS: We conducted a national cross-sectional web-based survey of GIM mentors, GIM fellowship directors, and GIM National Institutes of Health K24 grant awardees to capture their experiences with mentoring, including compensation for mentorship, multiple mentees, comentorship, and long-distance mentorship. We compared experiences by mentorship funding status, faculty type, academic rank, and sex. RESULTS: We collected data from 111 mentors (77% male, 54% full professors, and 68% clinician-investigators). Fifty-two (47%) received funding for mentorship. Mentors supervised a median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) of 5 (3, 8) mentees each, and would be willing to supervise a maximum of 6 (4, 10) mentees at once. Compared with mentors without funding, mentors with funding had more current mentees (mean of 8.3 vs 5.1, respectively; P<.001). Full professors had more current mentees than associate or assistant professors (8.0 vs 5.9 vs 2.4, respectively; P=.005). Ninety-four (85%) mentors had experience comentoring, and two-thirds of mentors had experience mentoring from a distance. Although most mentors found long-distance mentoring to be less demanding, most also said it is less effective for the mentee and is personally less fulfilling. CONCLUSIONS: Mentors in GIM appear to be close to their mentorship capacity, and the majority lack funding for mentorship. Comentoring and long-distance mentoring are common.     

A curriculum to teach internal medicine residents to perform house calls for older adults

Physician house calls are an important but underused mode of delivering health care to a growing population of homebound elderly patients. One major barrier to internal medicine physicians making house calls is a lack of training in this setting. This article describes a needs assessment survey of residents from nine internal medicine residency programs for a house call curriculum that combines a longitudinal clinical experience with Internet-based learning. Implementation of the curriculum was begun in July 2006, and data will be collected and results evaluated for at least 2 years. Several educational outcomes from the intervention are anticipated, including increased learner knowledge of house call medicine, improved learner confidence in making house calls, and program director satisfaction with the curriculum. This early work lays the foundation for determining the effect of a carefully designed curriculum on the number of practicing internists with the skills, knowledge, and attitudes necessary to meet the growing need for physician house calls.     

Musculoskeletal exam and joint injection training for internal medicine residents

We developed a musculoskeletal education intervention for internal medicine residents consisting of lectures, anatomic models, and a joint injection clinic. Written tests, observed musculoskeletal exams, and self-confidence scales were administered to 27 internal medicine residents before and after the intervention. Improvement was found in observed physical exam and self-reported confidence levels in performing knee injections. Confidence in shoulder injection skills improved, but remained low. Improved scores on written examination, though statistically significant, were not educationally significant. This single-institution pilot study demonstrates that a simple educational program results in improved knee and shoulder examination skills and confidence in performing knee injections. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The research was presented in poster format at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Midwest meeting October 1, 2004 in Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Internal Medicine Residency Program. No financial support was received for this research.     

General internal medicine practice trends in large multispecialty clinics

Objective:To assess practice trends in the general internal medicine departments of large multispecialty clinics. Design:A survey questionnaire addressing the following issues: 1) department size and rate of growth, 2) services provided, 3) patient population, 4) individual clinical workload, 5) call arrangements, 6) time away from practice, and 7) benefits and salary. Participants:22 multispecialty clinics, with a mean of 279 physicians. Measurements and results:Mean general internal medicine department physician expansion was 28% over the preceding three years. Primary care, clinic system access, care of patients laterally shifted from subspecialty internists, and preoperative evaluations were the four major services provided. The mix of fee-for-service, Medicare/Medicaid, and prepaid-plan patients was diverse. Mean outpatient clinical scheduling was 35 hours per week exclusive of hospital practice, administrative time, and paperwork. Study of call arrangements revealed a definite trend toward a group practice model of shared responsibility during the day as well as nights and weekends. Mean meeting and vacation time was 35 days per year. Salary was set by committee, formula, or both. Department stresses and dissatisfactions were also reported. Conclusions:Rapid expansion of general internal medicine departments and services will continue as subspecialists back away from providing primary care. The evolution of general internal medicine practice must be anticipated and managed for optimal patient and departmental outcomes.     

Systematic outpatient screening for the elderly: care of the vulnerable elderly practice improvement module to assess resident care of older adults

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of using the American Board of Internal Medicine Care of the Vulnerable Elderly Practice Improvement Module (CoVE PIM) in an internal medicine residency program and to assess aggregate resident documentation of geriatric screening in continuity clinics. DESIGN: Needs assessment chart review for single‐site pre‐/postintervention study. SETTING: Internal medicine resident primary care continuity clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty‐seven postgraduate year (PGY)‐1 and PGY‐2 internal medicine residents. MEASUREMENTS: Completion rate and time of CoVE PIM chart review, CoVE PIM user difficulty, and aggregate percentage of charts documenting geriatric screening measures. RESULTS: Sixty‐five percent of residents completed the CoVE PIM in an average of 47 minutes (range 30–90 minutes); 72% of resident surveys rated the CoVE PIM as easy to use. Residents demonstrated very good documentation of chronic medical conditions, smoking status, height, weight, and blood pressure and poor documentation of falls and fall risk, hearing assessment, postural hypotension, balance, rigidity, bradykinesia, home safety assessment, seat belt counseling, code status, and surrogate decision‐maker. CONCLUSION: The CoVE PIM can be used to assess aggregate resident performance of geriatric screening measures. In resident clinics, general adult screening performed by nurses is well documented, whereas geriatric‐specific screening performed by physicians is poorly documented.     

Changing habits of practice

PURPOSE: The majority of health care, both for acute and chronic conditions, is delivered in the ambulatory setting. Despite repeated proposals for change, the majority of internal medicine residency training still occurs in the inpatient setting. Substantial changes in ambulatory education are needed to correct the current imbalance. To assist educators and policy makers in this process, this paper reviews the literature on ambulatory education and makes recommendations for change. METHODS: The authors searched the Medline, Psychlit, and ERIC databases from 2000 to 2004 for studies that focused specifically on curriculum, teaching, and evaluation of internal medicine residents in the ambulatory setting to update previous reviews. Studies had to contain primary data and were reviewed for methodological rigor and relevance. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies met criteria for review. Thirty-five of the studies focused on specific curricular areas and 11 on ambulatory teaching methods. Five involved evaluating performance and 4 focused on structural issues. No study evaluated the overall effectiveness of ambulatory training or investigated the effects of current resident continuity clinic microsystems on education. CONCLUSION: This updated review continues to identify key deficiencies in ambulatory training curriculum and faculty skills. The authors make several recommendations: (1) Make training in the ambulatory setting a priority. (2) Address systems problems in practice environments. (3) Create learning experiences appropriate to the resident's level of development. (4) Teach and evaluate in the examination room. (5) Expand subspecialty-based training to the ambulatory setting. (6) Make faculty development a priority. (7) Create and fund multiinstitutional educational research consortia.     

Data and the internal medicine houseofficer

The authors surveyed 112 recent alumni and 92 current residents (70% responded) at a residency program that requires original research. Most alumni felt that the research project was a valuable learning experience, particularly in improving their abilities to critically review the medical literature. Almost a third felt that it had influenced their career choices (academic medicine vs private practice). The overall learning value of no other residency program component was rated significantly higher than that of the research project. While 65% of current residents supported making the senior resident research project optional, 64% of alumni opposed this change (p<0.0001). These results support requiring formal oral presentations and encouraging original research projects as a part of residency training. Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine, San Diego, Ca, March 23, 1992.