BACKGROUND: Internal medicine ambulatory training redesign, including recommendations to increase ambulatory training, is a focus of national discussion. Residents' and program directors' perceptions about ambulatory training models are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe internal medicine residents' and program directors' perceptions regarding ambulatory training duration, alternative ambulatory training models, and factors important for ambulatory education. DESIGN: National cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents (N = 14,941) and program directors (N = 222) who completed the 2007 Internal Medicine In-Training Examination (IM-ITE) Residents Questionnaire or Program Directors Survey, representing 389 US residency programs. RESULTS: A total of 58.4% of program directors and 43.7% of residents preferred one-third or more training time in outpatient settings. Resident preferences for one-third or more outpatient training increased with higher levels of training (48.3% PGY3), female sex (52.7%), primary care program enrollment (64.8%), and anticipated outpatient-focused career, such as geriatrics. Most program directors (77.3%) and residents (58.4%) preferred training models containing weekly clinic. Although residents and program directors reported problems with competing inpatient-outpatient responsibilities (74.9% and 88.1%, respectively) and felt that absence of conflict with inpatient responsibilities is important for good outpatient training (69.4% and 74.2%, respectively), only 41.6% of residents and 22.7% of program directors supported models eliminating ambulatory sessions during inpatient rotations. CONCLUSIONS: Residents' and program directors' preferences for outpatient training differ from recommendations for increased ambulatory training. Discordance was observed between reported problems with conflicting inpatient-outpatient responsibilities and preferences for models maintaining longitudinal clinic during inpatient rotations. Further study regarding benefits and barriers of ambulatory redesign is needed.
BACKGROUND: Internal medicine ambulatory training redesign, including recommendations to increase ambulatory training, is a focus of national discussion. Residents' and program directors' perceptions about ambulatory training models are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe internal medicine residents' and program directors' perceptions regarding ambulatory training duration, alternative ambulatory training models, and factors important for ambulatory education. DESIGN: National cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents (N = 14,941) and program directors (N = 222) who completed the 2007 Internal Medicine In-Training Examination (IM-ITE) Residents Questionnaire or Program Directors Survey, representing 389 US residency programs. RESULTS: A total of 58.4% of program directors and 43.7% of residents preferred one-third or more training time in outpatient settings. Resident preferences for one-third or more outpatient training increased with higher levels of training (48.3% PGY3), female sex (52.7%), primary care program enrollment (64.8%), and anticipated outpatient-focused career, such as geriatrics. Most program directors (77.3%) and residents (58.4%) preferred training models containing weekly clinic. Although residents and program directors reported problems with competing inpatient-outpatient responsibilities (74.9% and 88.1%, respectively) and felt that absence of conflict with inpatient responsibilities is important for good outpatient training (69.4% and 74.2%, respectively), only 41.6% of residents and 22.7% of program directors supported models eliminating ambulatory sessions during inpatient rotations. CONCLUSIONS: Residents' and program directors' preferences for outpatient training differ from recommendations for increased ambulatory training. Discordance was observed between reported problems with conflicting inpatient-outpatient responsibilities and preferences for models maintaining longitudinal clinic during inpatient rotations. Further study regarding benefits and barriers of ambulatory redesign is needed.
Authors: Patricia G McBurney; Colleen M Moran; Walton L Ector; Thomas G Quattlebaum; Paul M Darden Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Francine C Wiest; Timothy G Ferris; Manjusha Gokhale; Eric G Campbell; Joel S Weissman; David Blumenthal Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-11-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Eric J Warm; Daniel P Schauer; Tiffiny Diers; Bradley R Mathis; Yvette Neirouz; James R Boex; Gregory W Rouan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sanjay Saint; Judith K Zemencuk; Rodney A Hayward; Carol E Golin; Thomas R Konrad; Mark Linzer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Marion Stanley; Bridget O'Brien; Katherine Julian; Sharad Jain; Patricia Cornett; Harry Hollander; Robert B Baron; R Jeffrey Kohlwes Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-09 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
Authors: Saima I Chaudhry; Sandy Balwan; Karen A Friedman; Suzanne Sunday; Basit Chaudhry; Deborah Dimisa; Alice Fornari Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mark L Wieland; Andrew J Halvorsen; Rajeev Chaudhry; Darcy A Reed; Furman S McDonald; Kris G Thomas Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Andrew Coyle; Ira Helenius; Christina M Cruz; E Allison Lyons; Natalie May; John Andrilli; M Merav Bannet; Rachel Pinotti; David C Thomas Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2019-04