PURPOSE: Continuity clinics (ccs) give trainees an opportunity for longitudinal follow-up of a patient cohort. Trainees can function in a semi-autonomous manner and prepare for independent practice. Data about such clinics in Canada are limited. Our objective was to assess the utility of ccs in Canadian oncology training programs. METHODS: Surveys were developed by the authors for medical and radiation oncology program directors (pds) and trainees, to assess the utility of ccs in Canadian oncology training programs.oncology patients, to assess their attitudes toward ccs. The pds were contacted by e-mail, using the Web site of the Canadian Resident Matching Service; the trainees were contacted by e-mail through the pds and their administrative assistants. Surveys were distributed electronically using SurveyMonkey. Patients were approached by staff oncologists during follow-up visits at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre. RESULTS: Completed surveys were received from 33% of trainees and 63% of pds contacted; patient surveys were completed by 95 patients. Participation in a cc was reported by 47% of responding pds and 37% of responding trainees. Among respondents, 80% rated the ccs as "important" or "very important" to training. The biggest challenge identified by trainees and pds was lack of clinic space. Most pds (57%) and trainees (59%) felt that the staff oncologist should review the patient only if the trainee has concerns, but only 37% of patients shared that view (p = 0.0002). However, many patients expressed the desire to participate in trainee education. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity clinics are considered beneficial by pds and trainees. Patients desire more trainee supervision than the trainees themselves and the pds do, a factor that should be considered when implementing a cc.
PURPOSE: Continuity clinics (ccs) give trainees an opportunity for longitudinal follow-up of a patient cohort. Trainees can function in a semi-autonomous manner and prepare for independent practice. Data about such clinics in Canada are limited. Our objective was to assess the utility of ccs in Canadian oncology training programs. METHODS: Surveys were developed by the authors for medical and radiation oncology program directors (pds) and trainees, to assess the utility of ccs in Canadian oncology training programs.oncology patients, to assess their attitudes toward ccs. The pds were contacted by e-mail, using the Web site of the Canadian Resident Matching Service; the trainees were contacted by e-mail through the pds and their administrative assistants. Surveys were distributed electronically using SurveyMonkey. Patients were approached by staff oncologists during follow-up visits at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre. RESULTS: Completed surveys were received from 33% of trainees and 63% of pds contacted; patient surveys were completed by 95 patients. Participation in a cc was reported by 47% of responding pds and 37% of responding trainees. Among respondents, 80% rated the ccs as "important" or "very important" to training. The biggest challenge identified by trainees and pds was lack of clinic space. Most pds (57%) and trainees (59%) felt that the staff oncologist should review the patient only if the trainee has concerns, but only 37% of patients shared that view (p = 0.0002). However, many patients expressed the desire to participate in trainee education. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity clinics are considered beneficial by pds and trainees. Patients desire more trainee supervision than the trainees themselves and the pds do, a factor that should be considered when implementing a cc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Continuity clinics; medical education; oncology; residency training
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