An Intensive Continuity Clinic Immersion Experience for Interns: A Springboard to Confidence and Satisfaction With Continuity Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Providing a robust continuity clinic experience is difficult due to uneven distribution of resident time. Immersion experiences early in training may improve residents' learning experiences. OBJECTIVE: We designed and implemented a continuity immersion experience to improve internal medicine interns' satisfaction and confidence with their outpatient skills, and we evaluated the timing of the experience and its benefits for learners. METHODS: Two cohorts of interns at 1 academic institution participated in a 3-week immersion block (during the first or second quarter of the intern year). Interns were surveyed twice about satisfaction and confidence. Analysis included independent and paired sample t tests to compare interns' responses pre- and postimmersion, and to evaluate effects over time. RESULTS: A total of 124 interns completed the immersion, with a survey response rate of 61%. Interns' self-rated confidence on a 5-point Likert scale improved significantly compared with preimmersion in the areas of medical knowledge and confidence with their electronic health record and communication skills (P ≤ .010 for all assessments). Interns reported high satisfaction with continuity clinic following immersion (cohort 1: 4.5 ± 0.54; cohort 2: 4.3 ± 0.68; on a 5-point scale with 5 = very satisfied). Improvements in knowledge, skills, and satisfaction in cohort 1 were sustained over 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: A 3-week immersion experience in the first 6 months of residency improved interns' confidence in ambulatory content areas and satisfaction with clinic.

Educating generalists: factors of resident continuity clinic associated with perceived impact on choosing a generalist career.

BACKGROUND: Fewer residents are choosing general internal medicine (GIM) careers, and their choice 5 be influenced by the continuity clinic experience during residency. We sought to explore the relationship between resident satisfaction with the continuity clinic experience and expressed interest in pursuing a GIM career. METHODS: We surveyed internal medicine residents by using the Veterans Health Administration Office of Academic Affiliations Learners' Perceptions Survey-a 76-item instrument with established reliability and validity that measures satisfaction with faculty interactions, and learning, working, clinical, and physical environments, and personal experience. We identified 15 reliable subscales within the survey and asked participants whether their experience would prompt them to consider future employment opportunities in GIM. We examined the association between satisfaction measures and future GIM interest with 1-way analyses of variance followed by Student-Newman-Keuls post hoc tests. RESULTS: Of 217 residents, 90 (41%) completed the survey. Residents felt continuity clinic influenced career choice, with 22% more likely to choose a GIM career and 43% less likely. Those more likely to choose a GIM career had higher satisfaction with the learning (P  =  .001) and clinical (P  =  .002) environments and personal experience (P < .001). They also had higher satisfaction with learning processes (P  =  .002), patient diversity (P < .001), coordination of care (P  =  .009), workflow (P  =  .001), professional/personal satisfaction (P < .001), and work/life balance (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The continuity clinic experience 5 influence residents' GIM career choice. Residents who indicate they are more likely to pursue GIM based on that clinical experience have higher levels of satisfaction. Further prospective data are needed to assess if changes in continuity clinic toward these particular factors can enhance career choice.

Medical students retain pain assessment and management skills long after an experiential curriculum: a controlled study.

We implemented a pain assessment and management (PAM) curriculum for second year medical students and evaluated long-term skills retention compared to the prior year's class which did not receive the curriculum. The curriculum included pain pathophysiology, assessment and treatment instruction plus feedback on PAM practice with standardized patients. Both cohorts underwent a required end-of-third-year clinical skills examination. Intervention and control group performance on three pain cases (acute, chronic and terminal) was compared. The PAM curriculum was implemented 1.5years before the intervention cohort participated in the clinical skills exam. More intervention students (134/159, 84.3% response rate) obtained basic (87.2% vs. 76.0%, p=.028) and comprehensive (75.2% vs. 60.9%, p=.051) descriptions of acute pain than control students (n=129/174, 74.1% response rate). Intervention students demonstrated superior skills for terminal pain, including: more often asking about impact on functioning (40.7% vs. 25.8%, p=.027), advising change of medication (97.3% vs. 38.7%, p<.001), and providing additional medication counseling (55.0% vs. 27.0%, p<.001). Virtually all students obtained basic descriptions of chronic (intervention vs. control, 98.1% vs. 96.1%, p=.367) and terminal (92.9% vs. 91.7%, p=.736) pain. Surprisingly, more control than intervention students obtained a comprehensive description of chronic pain (94.6% vs. 77.8%, p<.001) and asked about current pain medication in the terminal case (75.6% vs. 55.0%, p=.004). Exposure to the curriculum resulted in durable increases in students' ability to perform PAM skills in patients with acute and terminal pain.

Two decades of Title VII support of a primary care residency: process and outcomes.

PURPOSE: To assess 23 years of Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Title VII Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry funding to the New York University School of Medicine/Bellevue Primary Care Internal Medicine Residency Program. The program, begun in 1983 within a traditional, inner-city, subspecialty-oriented internal medicine program, evolved into a crucible of systematic innovation, catalyzed and made feasible by initiatives funded by the HRSA. The curriculum stressed three pillars of generalism: psychosocial medicine, clinical epidemiology, and health policy. It developed tight, objectives-driven, effective, nonmedical specialty blocks and five weekly primary care activities that created a paradigm-driven, community-based, role-modeling matrix. Innovation was built in. Every block and activity was evaluated immediately and in an annual, program-wide retreat. Evaluation evolved from behavioral checklists of taped interviews to performance-based, systematic, annual objective structured clinical examinations. METHOD: The authors reviewed eight grant proposals, project reports, and curriculum and program evaluations. They also quantitatively and qualitatively surveyed the 122 reachable graduates from the first 20 graduating classes of the program. RESULTS: Analysis of program documents revealed recurring emphases on the use of proven educational models, strategic innovation, and assessment and evaluation to design and refine the program. There were 104 respondents (85%) to the survey. A total of 87% of the graduates practice as primary care physicians, 83% teach, and 90% work with the underserved; 54% do research, 36% actively advocate on health issues for their patients, programs, and other constituencies, and 30% publish. Graduates cited work in the community and faculty excitement and energy as essential elements of the program's impact; overall, graduates reported high personal and career satisfaction and low burnout. CONCLUSIONS: With HRSA support, a focused, innovative program evolved which has already met each of the six recommendations for future innovation of the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Education Redesign Task Force. This article is part of a theme issue of Academic Medicine on the Title VII health professions training programs.