BACKGROUND: The benefits of mentoring residents have been studied, but there is no research about mentoring new program directors. Program directors' responsibilities have become increasingly complicated, and they may not be adequately prepared for their role at the time of appointment without the benefit of mentoring that is specific to their new role. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether nephrology subspecialty program directors were specifically mentored and whether they felt prepared for the educational and administrative aspects of this role. METHODS: We conducted an electronic needs assessment survey of the nephrology subspecialty program directors through the American Society of Nephrology listserv for program directors. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 42% (58 of 139). Of the respondents, 58% did not feel adequately prepared when they first became subspecialty program directors, and only 32% reported having formal or informal mentoring for the role. Individuals who had served as associate program directors (34%) were more likely to report mentoring than those who had not (P = .02). Eighty percent of respondents reported that mentoring from another nephrology program director would have been beneficial during their first several years. CONCLUSIONS: This appears to be the first study specifically evaluating mentoring experiences relevant to the role of nephrology program director. As a result of this survey, the American Society of Nephrology Training Program Director Executive Committee recognized the need to provide opportunities for mentoring new nephrology program directors and formed a New Training Program Director Training and Mentoring Work Group to recommend initiatives for mentoring and training new program directors. Further investigation is needed to assess whether mentoring benefits subspecialty program directors and whether these findings can be generalized to other specialties and subspecialties.
BACKGROUND: The benefits of mentoring residents have been studied, but there is no research about mentoring new program directors. Program directors' responsibilities have become increasingly complicated, and they may not be adequately prepared for their role at the time of appointment without the benefit of mentoring that is specific to their new role. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether nephrology subspecialty program directors were specifically mentored and whether they felt prepared for the educational and administrative aspects of this role. METHODS: We conducted an electronic needs assessment survey of the nephrology subspecialty program directors through the American Society of Nephrology listserv for program directors. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 42% (58 of 139). Of the respondents, 58% did not feel adequately prepared when they first became subspecialty program directors, and only 32% reported having formal or informal mentoring for the role. Individuals who had served as associate program directors (34%) were more likely to report mentoring than those who had not (P = .02). Eighty percent of respondents reported that mentoring from another nephrology program director would have been beneficial during their first several years. CONCLUSIONS: This appears to be the first study specifically evaluating mentoring experiences relevant to the role of nephrology program director. As a result of this survey, the American Society of Nephrology Training Program Director Executive Committee recognized the need to provide opportunities for mentoring new nephrology program directors and formed a New Training Program Director Training and Mentoring Work Group to recommend initiatives for mentoring and training new program directors. Further investigation is needed to assess whether mentoring benefits subspecialty program directors and whether these findings can be generalized to other specialties and subspecialties.
Authors: Sara E Luckhaupt; Marshall H Chin; Carol M Mangione; Russell S Phillips; Douglas Bell; Anthony C Leonard; Joel Tsevat Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 5.128