CONTEXT: Although both internal medicine (IM) and family practice (FP) physicians frequently provide care for the same common adult conditions, IM and FP residency programs differ in their training emphases. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in IM and FP residents' self-perceived preparedness to diagnose and treat common adult medical conditions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of a national survey administered in the spring of 1998 to residents in their final year of residency at US academic health centers. A total of 279 IM residents in 25 programs and 326 FP residents in 75 programs responded to the survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Residents' self-rated preparedness to diagnose and treat 4 inpatient conditions (acute myocardial infarction, diabetic ketoacidosis, acute asthma, and acute renal failure) and 8 outpatient conditions (diabetes, hypertension, low back pain, vaginitis, headache, depression, upper respiratory tract infection, and hyperlipidemia), controlling for resident sex, race/ethnicity, US medical school graduate status, intent to subspecialize, and estimates of exposure to patients in inpatient and outpatient settings. RESULTS: Internal medicine residents were more likely to report being very prepared for all 4 inpatient conditions (P< or =.001), while FP residents were more likely to report being very prepared for 5 of 8 outpatient conditions (P< or =.05). Differences between IM and FP residents persisted in multivariate analyses for all inpatient conditions and some outpatient conditions. Exposure to patients in inpatient and outpatient settings varied by specialty and was significantly associated with resident self-report of preparedness for a majority of conditions investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine and FP residents report differences in preparedness to manage common adult conditions. These differences were consistent with the emphasis on an inpatient setting for IM residents and on office-based care for FP residents.
CONTEXT: Although both internal medicine (IM) and family practice (FP) physicians frequently provide care for the same common adult conditions, IM and FP residency programs differ in their training emphases. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in IM and FP residents' self-perceived preparedness to diagnose and treat common adult medical conditions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of a national survey administered in the spring of 1998 to residents in their final year of residency at US academic health centers. A total of 279 IM residents in 25 programs and 326 FP residents in 75 programs responded to the survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Residents' self-rated preparedness to diagnose and treat 4 inpatient conditions (acute myocardial infarction, diabetic ketoacidosis, acute asthma, and acute renal failure) and 8 outpatient conditions (diabetes, hypertension, low back pain, vaginitis, headache, depression, upper respiratory tract infection, and hyperlipidemia), controlling for resident sex, race/ethnicity, US medical school graduate status, intent to subspecialize, and estimates of exposure to patients in inpatient and outpatient settings. RESULTS: Internal medicine residents were more likely to report being very prepared for all 4 inpatient conditions (P< or =.001), while FP residents were more likely to report being very prepared for 5 of 8 outpatient conditions (P< or =.05). Differences between IM and FP residents persisted in multivariate analyses for all inpatient conditions and some outpatient conditions. Exposure to patients in inpatient and outpatient settings varied by specialty and was significantly associated with resident self-report of preparedness for a majority of conditions investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine and FP residents report differences in preparedness to manage common adult conditions. These differences were consistent with the emphasis on an inpatient setting for IM residents and on office-based care for FP residents.
Authors: Eric S Holmboe; Judith L Bowen; Michael Green; Jessica Gregg; Lorenzo DiFrancesco; Eileen Reynolds; Patrick Alguire; David Battinelli; Catherine Lucey; Daniel Duffy Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Judith L Bowen; Stephen M Salerno; John K Chamberlain; Elizabeth Eckstrom; Helen L Chen; Suzanne Brandenburg Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lorenzo Di Francesco; Michael J Pistoria; Andrew D Auerbach; Robert J Nardino; Eric S Holmboe Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Joseph A Greer; Elyse R Park; Alexander R Green; Joseph R Betancourt; Joel S Weissman Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-05-22 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lisa M Kern; Yolanda Barrón; A John Blair; Jerry Salkowe; Deborah Chambers; Mark A Callahan; Rainu Kaushal Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mohan Nadkarni; Siddharta Reddy; Carol K Bates; Blair Fosburgh; Stewart Babbott; Eric Holmboe Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-07-14 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Maureen D Francis; Kris Thomas; Michael Langan; Amy Smith; Sean Drake; Keri Lyn Gwisdalla; Ronald R Jones; Katherine A Julian; Christopher Nabors; Anne Pereira; Michael Rosenblum; Andrew Varney; Eric Warm; Melchor Ortiz Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2014-06