scholarly journals Residency Leader Motivations to Engage Residents and Residency Faculty in Scholarship: A Qualitative Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (8) ◽  
pp. 581-585
Author(s):  
Lauren A. Cafferty ◽  
Paul F. Crawford ◽  
Jeremy T. Jackson ◽  
Christy J.W. Ledford
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Scholarly Activity ◽  
Resident Attitudes ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Program Leaders ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Positive Attitudes ◽  
The Family ◽  
Emerging Themes

Background and Objectives: Research shows that limited time, lack of funding, difficulty identifying mentors, and lack of technical support limit resident and faculty ability to fully participate in scholarly activity. Most research to date focuses on medical student and resident attitudes toward research. This study aimed to understand the underlying attitudes of family medicine residency (FMR) leaders toward scholarship. Methods: Two focus groups of family medicine residency leaders were conducted in March 2018. The sample (N=19) was recruited through the membership directory of the Family Physicians Inquiry Network. Results: Leaders shared positive attitudes toward scholarship; however, motivation to engage residents and residency faculty in scholarship diverged. Motivations for promoting scholarly activity among participants were either extrinsic (through ACGME, program graduation, or promotion requirements) or intrinsic (through personal interest and natural drive). Conclusions: Emerging themes illustrate differences in how FMR program leaders perceive the role of scholarship in residency programs. As programs aim to increase research and scholarship, more attention must be paid to the motivating messages communicated by the program’s leadership.

scholarly journals A Curriculum to Increase Resident Scholarly Activity

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert P. Lennon ◽  
Roselyn W. Clemente Fuentes ◽  
Christine Broszko ◽  
John J. Koch ◽  
Kristian Sanchack ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Scholarly Activity ◽  
Resident Attitudes ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Sample Test ◽  
Naval Hospital ◽  
Curricular Interventions ◽  
Sustained Increase ◽  
Peer Leader

Background and Objectives: Scholarly activity (SA) is an Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement for family medicine residents. Engaging residents in scholarly activity can be challenging. Naval Hospital Jacksonville Family Medicine Residency (NHJ) pioneered a curriculum that led to a dramatic, sustained increase in resident SA. We sought to implement the curriculum in other family medicine residency programs. Methods: The curriculum was implemented at two additional family medicine residencies. Three curricular interventions were identified: a 3-hour case report workshop, a written practical guide to scholarly activity, and a resident peer research leader. One program implemented all three elements. The other implemented the workshop and written guide, but did not identify a resident peer leader. SA was measured using the annual ACGME program director report and compared the intervention year to the previous 3 years of SA using a 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. We used pre- and postintervention surveys to evaluate resident attitudes about SA. Results: The program implementing all three interventions increased residents’ conference presentation 302% (n=34, P<.001). The program that did not identify a resident peer leader had no significant change in SA as reported to the ACGME. Conclusions: The curriculum was implemented in two additional residencies with promising results. We recommend further implementation across multiple sites to determine the extent to which the results are generalizable.

scholarly journals Examining the Functioning and Reliability of the Family Medicine Milestones

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Peabody ◽  
Thomas R. O'Neill ◽  
Lars E. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Item Difficulty ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Latent Trait ◽  
Training Sequence ◽  
Partial Credit Model ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Program Leaders ◽  
The Family ◽  
Key Dimensions

ABSTRACT Background  The Family Medicine (FM) Milestones are a framework designed to assess development of residents in key dimensions of physician competency. Residency programs use the milestones in semiannual reviews of resident performance from entry toward graduation. Objective  To examine the functioning and reliability of the FM Milestones and to determine whether they measure the amount of a latent trait (eg, knowledge or ability) possessed by a resident or simply indicate where a resident falls along the training sequence. Methods  This study utilized the Rasch Partial Credit model to examine academic year 2014–2015 ratings for 10 563 residents from 476 residency programs (postgraduate year [PGY] 1 = 3639; PGY-2 = 3562; PGY-3 = 3351; PGY-4 = 11). Results  Reliability was exceptionally high at 0.99. Mean scores were 3.2 (SD = 1.3) for PGY-1; 5.0 (SD = 1.3) for PGY-2; 6.7 (SD = 1.2) for PGY-3; and 7.4 (SD = 1.0) for PGY-4. Keyform analysis showed a rating on 1 item was likely to be similar for all other items. Conclusions  Our findings suggest that FM Milestones seem to largely function as intended. Lack of spread in item difficulty and lack of variation in category probabilities show that FM Milestones do not measure the amount of a latent trait possessed by a resident, but rather describe where a resident falls along the training sequence. High reliability indicates residents are being rated in a stable manner as they progress through residency, and individual residents deviating from this rating structure warrant consideration by program leaders.

scholarly journals Education in Quality Improvement for Practice in Primary Care During Residency Training and Subsequent Activities in Practice

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Carek ◽  
Lori M. Dickerson ◽  
Michele Stanek ◽  
Charles Carter ◽  
Mark T. Godenick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Standardized Curriculum

Abstract Background Quality improvement (QI) is an integral aspect of graduate medical education and an important competence for physicians. Objective We examined the QI activities of recent family medicine residency graduates and whether a standardized curriculum in QI during residency resulted in greater self-reported participation in QI activities in practice after graduation. Methods The family medicine residency programs affiliated with the South Carolina Area Health Education Consortium (N  =  7) were invited to participate in this study. Following completion of introductory educational activities, each site implemented regularly occurring (at least monthly) educational and patient care activities using QI principles and tools. Semiannually, representatives from each participating site met to review project aims and to provide updates regarding the QI activities in their program. To examine the impact of this project on QI activities, we surveyed graduates from participating programs from the year prior to and 2 years after the implementation of the curriculum. Results Graduates in the preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts reported participating in periodic patient care data review, patient care registries, QI projects, and disease-specific activities (57%–71% and 54%–63%, respectively). There were no significant differences in QI activities between the 2 groups except in activities associated with status of their practice as a patient-centered medical home. Conclusions Most but not all family medicine graduates reported they were actively involved in QI activities within their practices, independent of their exposure to a QI curriculum during training.

scholarly journals Residency Scholarship Within Practice-based Research Networks

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-96
Author(s):  
Amanda Weidner ◽  
Ryan Gilles ◽  
Dean A. Seehusen
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Scholarly Activity ◽  
Research Networks ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Practice Based Research

Background and Objectives: Finding scholarship opportunities is a common struggle for family medicine residency programs, especially community-based programs. Participation in practice-based research networks (PBRNs) has been suggested as one option, but little is known about resident engagement in PBRNs. This study explores how PBRNs are currently involving family medicine residency programs and whether there are additional opportunities for engagement. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 126 primary care PBRN directors regarding residency program involvement in PBRN governance and scholarly activity. We used descriptive statistics to characterize our sample and bivariate analyses to assess association between involvement of residency programs in PBRNs and PBRN characteristics. Results: Most responding PBRNs (N=56, 44.4% response rate) included at least one residency program (80%) and many had residency faculty involved in projects (67.3%), though involvement of residents was less common (52.7%). When involved, residents were part of fewer projects but participated in the full range of research activities. Few PBRNs had deeper engagement with residencies such as written goals specifying their inclusion in projects (23.6%) or residency faculty participation in the PBRN’s governing body (45.5%). Most PBRNs not currently involving residents are interested in doing so (73.9%), and half of these have the resources to do this. Conclusions: Most family medicine and primary care PBRNs have some involvement with residency programs, usually at the faculty level. Building on current PBRN involvement and making connections between local PBRNs and residency programs where none exist represents an excellent opportunity for education and for growing the research capacity of the discipline.

scholarly journals Surveying Applicants to Improve the Family Medicine Residency Interview Day

PRiMER ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason R. Woloski ◽  
Daniel Schlegel
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Electronic Communication ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Program Support ◽  
The Family ◽  
Penn State ◽  
Communication Methods ◽  
A Current

Introduction: The diversity of family medicine residency programs across the country makes a generalized assessment of applicant preferences and experiences regarding the interview experience difficult. As such, there have been few publications in recent years relating to interview trail trends and modification of the interview day process to meet the needs of applicants. The purpose of this project was to identify applicant preferences and trends among applicants interviewing at Penn State Health’s Milton S. Hershey Medical Center during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 application cycles. Methods: Applicants completed a voluntary, anonymous, 16-question multiple-choice survey  during the interview day. Questions explored the preinterview dinner, interview day, and postinterview day communication methods. Results: In total, 67 surveys were collected from 68 eligible candidates (98.5%) in 2014-2015, and 65 surveys from 65 eligible candidates in 2015-2016 (100%) for a total of 132 participants. Applicant preferences focused on use of electronic communication and the importance of interviewing with both the program director and a current resident. Interview day trends experienced by those surveyed emphasized the inclusion of spouses/significant others, program support of hotel costs, frequency of applicant preinterview dinners, and the lack of emphasis on second-look visits.  Conclusion: This study highlights how the utilization of applicant surveys during the interview day may allow family medicine programs to identify trends occurring on the interview trail, while developing an interview day agenda that meets the desires of the applicants the program attracts.

scholarly journals Benchmarking of provider competencies and current training for prevention and management of obesity among family medicine residency programs: a cross-sectional survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuela Orjuela-Grimm ◽  
W. Scott Butsch ◽  
Silvia Bhatt-Carreño ◽  
B. Gabriel Smolarz ◽  
Goutham Rao
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Weight Stigma ◽  
Variable Degree ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Program Leaders ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Treatment Of Obesity

Abstract Background U.S. physicians lack training in caring for patients with obesity. For family medicine, the newly developed Obesity Medicine Education Collaborative (OMEC) competencies provide an opportunity to compare current training with widely accepted standards. We aimed to evaluate the current state of obesity training in family medicine residency programs. Methods We conducted a study consisting of a cross-sectional survey of U.S. family medicine residency program leaders. A total of 735 directors (including associate/assistant directors) from 472 family medicine residency programs identified from the American Academy of Family Physicians public directory were invited via postal mail to complete an online survey in 2018. Results Seventy-seven program leaders completed surveys (16% response rate). Sixty-four percent of programs offered training on prevention of obesity and 83% provided training on management of patients with obesity; however, 39% of programs surveyed reported not teaching an approach to obesity management that integrates clinical and community systems as partners, or doing so very little. Topics such as behavioral aspects of obesity (52%), physical activity (44%), and nutritional aspects of obesity (36%) were the most widely covered (to a great extent) by residency programs. In contrast, very few programs extensively covered pharmacological treatment of obesity (10%) and weight stigma and discrimination (14%). Most respondents perceived obesity-related training as very important; 65% of the respondents indicated that expanding obesity education was a high or medium priority for their programs. Lack of room in the curriculum and lack of faculty expertise were reported as the greatest barriers to obesity education during residency. Only 21% of the respondents perceived their residents as very prepared to manage patients with obesity at the end of the residency training. Conclusion Family medicine residency programs are currently incorporating recommended teaching to address OMEC competencies to a variable degree, with some topic areas moderately well represented and others poorly represented such as pharmacotherapy and weight stigma. Very few program directors report their family medicine residents are adequately prepared to manage patients with obesity at the completion of their training. The OMEC competencies could serve as a basis for systematic obesity training in family medicine residency programs.

scholarly journals Maternity Care Tracks at US Family Medicine Residency Programs

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (10) ◽  
pp. 857-863
Author(s):  
Steven E. Roskos ◽  
Tyler W. Barreto ◽  
Julie P. Phillips ◽  
Valerie J. King ◽  
W. Suzanne Eidson-Ton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Maternity Care ◽  
Underserved Populations ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Family Medicine Residency ◽  
Survey Response Rate ◽  
Care Training ◽  
Practice Methods ◽  
Residency Program Directors ◽  
The Relationship

Background and Objectives: The number of family physicians providing maternity care continues to decline, jeopardizing access to needed care for underserved populations. Accreditation changes in 2014 provided an opportunity to create family medicine residency maternity care tracks, providing comprehensive maternity care training only for interested residents. We examined the relationship between maternity care tracks and residents’ educational experiences and postgraduate practice. Methods: We included questions on maternity care tracks in an omnibus survey of family medicine residency program directors (PDs). We divided respondent programs into three categories: “Track,” “No Track Needed,” and “No Track.” We compared these program types by their characteristics, number of resident deliveries, and number of graduates practicing maternity care. Results: The survey response rate was 40%. Of the responding PDs, 79 (32%) represented Track programs, 55 (22%) No Track Needed programs, and 94 (38%) No Track programs. Residents in a track attended more deliveries than those not in a track (at Track programs) and those at No Track Needed and No Track programs. No Track Needed programs reported the highest proportion of graduates accepting positions providing inpatient maternity care in 2019 (21%), followed by Track programs (17%) and No Track programs (5%; P<.001). Conclusions: Where universal robust maternity care education is not feasible, maternity care tracks are an excellent alternative to provide maternity care training and produce graduates who will practice maternity care. Programs that cannot offer adequate experience to achieve competence in inpatient maternity care may consider instituting a maternity care track.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document