Do general internal medicine fellows find jobs that match their training?

We surveyed employers of general internists at teaching hospitals to determine whether they prefer that new hires are graduates of general internal medicine (GIM) fellowships. We surveyed former GIM fellows who graduated between 1988 and 1994 to determine whether they found jobs with protected research time and whether the positions they found matched their expectations. Employers rated a GIM fellowship, among other criteria, as important for clinician-researchers, but not for clinician-educators. For graduates categorized as clinician-researchers (with more than 33% of their time protected for research), there was a good match between their actual time allocations for research and clinical work and what they recalled their expectations were when looking for a job. Clinician-educators had a marked discordance between actual time allocations for research and clinical work and their recollection of their expectations when looking for a job.     

Factors influencing the selection of general internal medicine fellowship programs

Although criteria are available to guide the selection of general internal medicine (GIM) fellowship programs, the factors actually used in this process are unclear. Using a survey of current GIM fellows, we determined that most received information from their residency advisors, and many viewed them as the most important source of fellowship information. Program location was the top selection factor for fellows, followed by research opportunities, availability of a mentor, and the reputation of the program. This information may be useful to both fellowship candidates as an additional selection guide and to program directors seeking to best structure and market their fellowships.     

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.     

Educational experiences and quality of life of gastroenterology fellows in the United States

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the education and quality of life of United States gastroenterology fellows. METHODS: A 3-page, 74-question survey incorporating a 5-point Likert scale was designed. All US gastroenterology fellowship program directors were contacted by mail and asked to distribute the survey to graduating fellows. Surveys were sent on 3/29/1998 and collected until 6/1/98. RESULTS: Fellows who would not train at the same institution again had less supervision, clinical instruction, research mentorship, and support services than those who would. Fellows who had loans had lower personal satisfaction scores than those who did not. Fellows who did not hold second jobs (moonlight) had higher job satisfaction scores. Those with vision or dental insurance had higher job and personal satisfaction scores. Regarding quality of life, only 23% of fellows agreed they were not overworked, 23% agreed they were not stressed, 25% agreed they were financially stable, 54% agreed they were happy with fellowship, and 84% agreed they were happy with their career choice. Regarding education, 56% agreed there was more emphasis on productivity than on education, 39% agreed they received adequate mentorship for research, 86% agreed there was adequate supervision, 48% of fellows agreed they had autonomy in making clinical decisions, and 41% agreed they had continuity of care in seeing patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most fellows were happy about their career choice and clinical instruction, but there were deficiencies regarding quality of life (stress, overwork, financial security), education (research support, continuity of care) and job benefits (health coverage).     

Resident Satisfaction with Continuity Clinic and Career Choice in General Internal Medicine

Background

The quality of the continuity clinic experience for internal medicine (IM) residents may influence their choice to enter general internal medicine (GIM), yet few data exist to support this hypothesis.

Objective

To assess the relationship between IM residents’ satisfaction with continuity clinic and interest in GIM careers.

Design

Cross-sectional survey assessing satisfaction with elements of continuity clinic and residents'' likelihood of career choice in GIM.

Participants

IM residents at three urban medical centers.

Main Measures

Bivariate and multivariate associations between satisfaction with 32 elements of outpatient clinic in 6 domains (clinical preceptors, educational environment, ancillary staff, time management, administrative, personal experience) and likelihood of considering a GIM career.

Key Results

Of the 225 (90 %) residents who completed surveys, 48 % planned to enter GIM before beginning their continuity clinic, whereas only 38 % did as a result of continuity clinic. Comparing residents’ likelihood to enter GIM as a result of clinic to likelihood to enter a career in GIM before clinic showed that 59 % of residents had no difference in likelihood, 28 % reported a lower likelihood as a result of clinic, and 11 % reported higher likelihood as a result of clinic. Most residents were very satisfied or satisfied with all clinic elements. Significantly more residents (p ≤ 0.002) were likely vs. unlikely to enter GIM if they were very satisfied with faculty mentorship (76 % vs. 53 %), time for appointments (28 % vs. 11 %), number of patients seen (33 % vs. 15 %), personal reward from work (51 % vs. 23 %), relationship with patients (64 % vs. 42 %), and continuity with patients (57 % vs. 33 %). In the multivariate analysis, being likely to enter GIM before clinic (OR 29.0, 95 % CI 24.0–34.8) and being very satisfied with the continuity of relationships with patients (OR 4.08, 95 % CI 2.50–6.64) were the strongest independent predictors of likelihood to enter GIM as a result of clinic.

Conclusions

Resident satisfaction with most aspects of continuity clinic was high; yet, continuity clinic had an overall negative influence on residents’ attitudes toward GIM careers. Targeting resources toward improving ambulatory patient continuity, workflow efficiency and increasing pre-residency interest in primary care may help build the primary care workforce.Key Words: medical education—career choice, medical education—graduate, primary care, ambulatory medicine     

Capturing the power of academic medicine to enhance health and health care of the elderly in the USA

As in Japan, the US population is aging progressively, a trend that will challenge the health-care system to provide for the chronic, multiple and complex needs of its elderly citizens. and as in Japan, the US academic health enterprise has only belatedly mounted a response to that challenge. Herein is reviewed a quarter of a century of the author's personal experience in developing new programs in gerontology and geriatric medicine from a base in the Department of Internal Medicine at three US academic health centers (AHC): The University of Washington (as Division Head), Johns Hopkins University (as Vice-Chair), and Wake Forest University (as Chair). Rather than to build a program from a new department of geriatrics, this strategy was chosen to capture the power and resources of the department of internal medicine, the largest university department, to 'gerontologize' the institution, beginning with general internal medicine and all of the medical subspecialties (the approach also chosen to date at all but a handful of US AHC). The keystone of success at each institution has been careful faculty development through fellowship training in clinical geriatrics, education and research. Over the same interval major national progress has occurred, including expanded research and training at the National Institute on Aging and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and accreditation of more than 100 fellowship programs for training and certification of geriatricians. However, less than 1% of US medical graduates elect to pursue such training. Hence such geriatricians will remain concentrated at AHC, and most future geriatric care in the USA will be provided by a broad array of specialists, who will be educated and trained in geriatrics by these academic geriatricians.     

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.     

Clinicians,educators, and investigators in general internal medicine

Financial and time pressures, disparate promotional pathways, geographic separation, and difficulty acknowledging personal fallibility can contribute to polarization of clinician-educators and investigators in general internal medicine (GIM). As a consequence, clinician-educators and investigators may fail to use their joint expertise, may encounter friction in their relationships, and may present a troubled image to trainees considering careers in GIM. We suggest specific strategies that clinician-educators, investigators, administrative leaders, and medical schools might use to foster collaboration.     

International perspectives on general internal medicine and the case for “globalization” of a discipline

General internal medicine (GIM) has flourished in the United States (U.S.). Unlike other subspecialties of internal medicine, however, GIM’s evolution has not been global in scope, but rather appears to have occurred in isolation within countries. Here, we describe international models of GIM from Canada, Switzerland, Australia/New Zealand, Argentina, and Japan, and compare these with the U.S. model. There are notable differences in the typical clinical roles assumed by General Internists across these 7 countries, but also important overlap in clinical and academic domains. Despite this overlap, there has been a relative lack of contact among General Internists from these and other countries at a truly international GIM meeting; the time is now for increased international exchange and the “globalization” of GIM. The authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Dr. Ghali is supported by a Health Scholar Award from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research, and by a Government of Canada Research Chair in Health Services Research.     

Strengthening the fellowship training experience: findings from a national survey of fellowship trained geriatricians 1990-1998

Geriatric fellowship training has significantly advanced in the past 2 decades in number, organization, and accreditation of formal fellowship programs. A recent survey examined career decision-making, fellowship training, and current professional activities of fellowship trained geriatricians. This paper focuses upon further desired fellowship training identified by these individuals. The responses reflect skills relevant to four aspects of professional performance: administration, management, clinical geriatrics, research, and education. More than half of the respondents documented the need for increased training in administration, including long-term care medical directorship and Medicare/managed care. Regarding clinical training, 66% recommended additional subspecialty training, particularly in psychiatry, neurology, rehabilitation, and hospice/palliative care. Seventeen percent identified a need for training in research methodology, grant writing, and mentorship. Some 6% indicated a need for further training in education, citing teaching skills and program/faculty development. This article provides examples of opportunities to strengthen each of the four defined areas, including formal training in medical administration by the American Medical Director's Association, model strategies for incorporating subspecialties, hospice/palliative care, programs to pursue graduate level training in research at many universities, and faculty development programs such as those offered by Harvard and Stanford. Accredited geriatric fellowship programs as well as fellows should recognize potential gaps in training, and make available opportunities to strengthen these areas critical to preparing for future careers in geriatric medicine.     

Creating a geriatric medicine fellowship program in 10 "easy" steps

The aging of the U.S. population poses one of the greatest future challenges for family medicine and internal medicine residency training. One important barrier to providing quality education and training in geriatric medicine to residents is a serious and growing shortage of practicing geriatricians and geriatrics faculty. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education currently accredits 45 family medicine-based and 107 internal medicine-based geriatric medicine fellowships in the United States. There are 13 American Osteopathic Association-certified geriatric medicine fellowship programs. In this article, the authors examine the rationale for the development of additional geriatric medicine fellowship programs and offer some practical suggestions and pointers for those interested in developing their own geriatric medicine fellowships. The authors write from the perspective of their own recent experiences with the development and accreditation of a family medicine residency-affiliated fellowship in geriatrics. Other residencies may find this article useful in determining the feasibility of developing a geriatric medicine fellowship for their programs and communities and will find practical guidance for beginning the process.     

Effect of the inpatient general medicine rotation on student pursuit of a generalist career

BACKGROUND: Entry into general internal medicine (GIM) has declined. The effect of the inpatient general medicine rotation on medical student career choices is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of student satisfaction with the ipatient general medicine rotation on pursuit of a career in GIM. DESIGN: Multicenter cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Third-year medical students between July 2001 and June 2003. MEASUREMENTS: End-of-internal medicine clerkship survey assessed satisfaction with the rotation using a 5-point Likert scale. Pursuit of a career in GIM defined as: (1) response of “Very Likely” or “Certain” to the question “How likely are you to pursue a career in GIM?”; and (2) entry into an internal medicine residency using institutional match data. RESULTS: Four hundred and two of 751 (54%) students responded. Of the student respondents, 307 (75%) matched in the 2 years following their rotations. Twenty-eight percent (87) of those that matched chose an internal medicine residency. Of these, 8% (25/307) were pursuing a career in GIM. Adjusting for site and preclerkship interest, overall satisfaction with the rotation predicted pursuit of a career in GIM (odds ratio [OR] 3.91, P < .001). Although satisfaction with individual items did not predict pursuit of a generalist career, factor analysis revealed 3 components of satisfaction (attending, resident, and teaching). Adjusting for preclerkship interest, 2 factors (attending and teaching) were associated with student pursuit of a career in GIM (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Increased satisfaction with the inpatient general medicine rotation promotes pursuit of a career in GIM.     

A primer on medical education in the United States through the lens of a current resident physician

Physician training and standards for medical licensure differ widely across the globe. The medical education process in the United States (US) typically involves a minimum of 11 years of formal training and multiple standardized examinations between graduating from secondary school and becoming an attending physician with full medical licensure. Students in the US traditionally enter a 4-year medical school after completing an undergraduate bachelor’s degree, in contrast to most other countries where medical training begins after graduation from high school. Medical school seniors planning to practice medicine in the US must complete postgraduate clinical training, referred to as residency, within the specialty of their choosing. The duration of residency varies depending on specialty, typically lasting between 3 and 7 years. For subspecialty fields, additional clinical training is often required in the form of a fellowship. Many experts have called for changes in the medical education system to shorten medical training in the US, and reforms are ongoing in some institutions. However, physician education in the US generally remains a progression from undergraduate premedical coursework to 4 years of medical school, followed by residency training with an optional subspecialty fellowship.     

Geriatrics training in general internal medicine fellowship programs: current practice, barriers, and strategies for improvement

To ensure its growth and prosperity, general internal medicine will need to embrace care of the elderly, research on aging, and geriatrics education as components of its core mission. Experts agree that general internal medicine fellows could benefit from increased opportunities in research on aging and geriatrics education; however, important barriers will hamper efforts to integrate geriatrics training into general internal medicine fellowship programs. This article reviews the barriers to integration and proposes solutions for overcoming those barriers. As a result of interviews and meetings with a broad representation of general internists, geriatricians, funding agencies, and policymakers, we propose 2 interventions: 1) the development of institutional program grants to foster collaboration between general internal medicine and geriatrics faculty in the training of general internal medicine fellows and 2) the creation of a 3-year fellowship program combining general internal medicine and geriatrics. This article discusses the importance of evaluating these and other programs intended to increase the geriatrics experience of general internal medicine fellows, and it describes the potential implications of these changes for a broad array of stakeholder institutions.     

The Association between the Establishment of a General Internal Medicine Department and an Increased Number of Blood Cultures in Other Departments: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

Objective The establishment of a department of general internal medicine (GIM) has been shown to improve the clinical outcomes among patients treated in GIM departments but the effect on practice patterns in other departments remains unclear. We evaluated the association between the establishment of a GIM department and the use of blood cultures, an indicator of quality of care of infectious diseases, in other departments. Methods This study was conducted between 2013 and 2017 in a community hospital which established a new GIM department in 2015, with a mandate to improve the quality of care of the hospital including infectious disease management. The primary outcome was the change in the number of blood culture episodes per calendar month in other departments before and after establishment of the GIM department. The secondary outcome was the change in the blood culture episodes per month, indexed to 1,000 patient-days, during the same time. Using 2015 as the phase-in period, interrupted time series analyses were used to evaluate the change in the outcome variables. Results In departments other than GIM, there were 284 blood cultures prior to the establishment of the GIM department (2013-2014) and 853 afterwards (2016-2017). The number of blood culture episodes in other departments increased by 10.7 (95%CI: 0.39-21.0, p=0.042) per calendar month after the establishment of the GIM department; blood culture episodes/calendar month/1,000 patient-days increased by 0.55 (95%CI: 0.03-1.07 p=0.037). Conclusion These results indicate that a GIM department in a community hospital can improve the quality of care in other departments.     

Renal Denervation in Hypertension

The column in this issue is supplied by Drs. Benjamin Lee, MD, and Usman Ansari, DO. Dr. Lee is an assistant professor of clinical medicine at the Houston Methodist Institute for Academic Medicine and Weill Cornell Medical College. After earning his medical degree at Harvard Medical School, Dr. Lee completed a residency in internal medicine and a nephrology fellowship at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) while simultaneously obtaining a master of advanced study in clinical research from the UCSF departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. He maintains his clinical practice with the Houston Kidney Consultants. Dr. Ansari earned a Doctor of Osteopathy from Touro University College of Osteopathic Medicine in California and is completing his internal medicine residency at Houston Methodist.