M B Harper1, E J Mayeaux, J B Pope, R Goel. 1. Department of Family Medicine and Comprehensive Care, Louisiana State University Medical Center, Shreveport, LA 71130-3932, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although procedural training in family practice has recently received greater emphasis, the current status of this training in residency programs has not been reported. Considerable variation in procedural training among family practice residencies is allowed by the American Board of Family Practice and accreditation requirements. This study was performed to report the current status of procedural training in family practice residencies and to determine whether a correlation exists between the number of procedures taught in family practice residencies and successful resident recruitment. METHODS: A one-page questionnaire was developed to determine availability of teaching and type of instructor for 24 selected procedures. This questionnaire was mailed to all 398 family practice residency directors in the United States. Data from the survey were compared with the published residency match results in 1993 and 1994. RESULTS: Questionnaires were received from 363 programs, for a response rate of 91 percent. The current status of training in these procedures, presented by program type and geographic region, reflects considerable regional variation. Training in colposcopy and in cardiac stress testing was reported to be available in a greater percentage of programs than in previous studies. A significant positive correlation was found between the number of procedures taught by family physicians and residency match results. CONCLUSIONS: The 91 percent response rate lends credibility to this status report and indicates that family practice program directors recognize procedural training as an important issue. The trend toward greater availability of procedural training in family practice residencies is confirmed for selected procedures. Emphasis on procedural training by family physicians has a positive correlation with successful resident recruiting. The impact on medical student interest in family practice deserves further study.
BACKGROUND: Although procedural training in family practice has recently received greater emphasis, the current status of this training in residency programs has not been reported. Considerable variation in procedural training among family practice residencies is allowed by the American Board of Family Practice and accreditation requirements. This study was performed to report the current status of procedural training in family practice residencies and to determine whether a correlation exists between the number of procedures taught in family practice residencies and successful resident recruitment. METHODS: A one-page questionnaire was developed to determine availability of teaching and type of instructor for 24 selected procedures. This questionnaire was mailed to all 398 family practice residency directors in the United States. Data from the survey were compared with the published residency match results in 1993 and 1994. RESULTS: Questionnaires were received from 363 programs, for a response rate of 91 percent. The current status of training in these procedures, presented by program type and geographic region, reflects considerable regional variation. Training in colposcopy and in cardiac stress testing was reported to be available in a greater percentage of programs than in previous studies. A significant positive correlation was found between the number of procedures taught by family physicians and residency match results. CONCLUSIONS: The 91 percent response rate lends credibility to this status report and indicates that family practice program directors recognize procedural training as an important issue. The trend toward greater availability of procedural training in family practice residencies is confirmed for selected procedures. Emphasis on procedural training by family physicians has a positive correlation with successful resident recruiting. The impact on medical student interest in family practice deserves further study.
Authors: Steven M Brunelli; Harold I Feldman; Sherif M Latif; Meera Gupta; Mark G Weiner; James D Lewis Journal: Fam Med Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 1.756