Creating a Centralized Infrastructure to Facilitate Medical Education Research.

PURPOSE: Building research capacity and increasing scholarly productivity are identified needs of the specialty of family medicine. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has increased the scholarly requirements for residency programs, placing even more pressure on faculty to be productive in the scholarly realm. The Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) was created by volunteer members of the specialty with shared interests in overcoming barriers and increasing scholarly production. METHODS: CERA has developed the infrastructure and expertise to regularly conduct omnibus surveys of key family medicine educational leaders. Proposals are centrally collected and competitively chosen. The omnibus survey process includes collaboration with experienced mentors, centralized institutional review board clearance, pilot testing, and centralized data collection. The survey results are disseminated back to research teams for presentation and publication of the findings. RESULTS: To date, over 115 research teams have had their projects included in CERA omnibus surveys. Projects have been led by research teams from across the country and with a wide variety of research experience. This collaborative work has resulted in more than 75 scientific presentations and over 55 peer-reviewed papers in the medical literature. The raw data are now available online and serve as a repository for future secondary analysis and as an educational resource. CONCLUSIONS: The CERA infrastructure has allowed a large number of research teams to conduct meaningful scholarship at a fraction of the typical cost in terms of time and energy. CERA has expanded family medicine research by removing barriers for teams with limited experience or resources.

Catheterized urine color change.

What caused the abrupt change in color of catheterized urine after several days of Foley catheter placement?

A collaborative model for developing and maintaining virtual patients for medical education.

There is great interest in using computer-assisted instruction in medical education, but getting computer-assisted instruction materials used broadly is difficult to achieve. We describe a successful model for the development and maintenance of a specific type of computer-assisted instruction - virtual patients - in medical education. The collaborative model's seven key components are described and compared to other models of diffusion of innovation and curriculum development. The collaborative development model that began in one medical discipline is now extended to two additional disciplines, through partnerships with their respective clerkship director organizations. We believe that the ability to achieve broad use of virtual patients, and to transition the programs from successfully relying on grant funding to financially self-sustaining, resulted directly from the collaborative development and maintenance process. This process can be used in other learning environments and for the development of other types of computer-assisted instruction programs.

Curricular Recommendations for a National Family Medicine Subinternship: A Qualitative Analysis From Multiple Stakeholders.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 2011 Alliance for Clinical Education panel recommended the development of a specialty-specific curriculum for all subinternships (sub-Is). A 2019 CERA survey found that 58% of family medicine clerkship directors agreed that a standardized curriculum would be helpful. The goal of this study was to explore attitudes and preferences regarding a national family medicine sub-I curriculum among a broad set of stakeholders. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with medical students, residents, residency faculty, and undergraduate medical education faculty at the 2020 STFM Conference on Medical Student Education. Focus groups were transcribed, and a qualitative analysis was conducted with participants' responses about the benefits and characteristics of a family medicine sub-I, recommendations for core sub-I skills/objectives, likelihood of using a national curriculum, and preferred student and program evaluation methods. RESULTS: There were four focus groups with a total of 24 participants. The following main themes emerged: the family medicine sub-I has distinctive characteristics from other sub-Is and provides unique benefits for students and residency programs, a standardized curriculum should allow for adaptability and flexibility, and the sub-I evaluation for the students and program should be specific and experience-focused. These themes were classified into specific subthemes. CONCLUSIONS: The stakeholder emphasis on themes of uniqueness, adaptability, and specificity within evaluation will help educators structure a comprehensive framework for national recommendations for the sub-I curriculum. A well-designed family medicine sub-I may provide rigorous educational training for students and may also encourage career commitment to the discipline.

Forward Feeding in Graduate Medical Education: Results of a National Survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: "Forward feeding" is defined as the sharing of information regarding learner behaviors and performance outside of formal institutional committee structures. The purpose of this study was to establish baseline opinions and policies of forward feeding in family medicine residency programs. METHODS: Data for this study were obtained as part of the 2015 CERA Program Directors Fall Survey. Program directors indicated whether they felt that faculty should and do engage in forward feeding. Respondents were asked to rate the importance of various types of information about learners (academic performance, clinical performance, professionalism, physical health, and mental health), reasons for promoting, and concerns regarding forward feeding on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 49% (227/461). Most agreed that faculty should (87%) and do (83%) engage in forward feeding. Concerns regarding professionalism and clinical performance were reported as most important to share. The most important reason identified for forward feeding was the early identification of struggling residents, followed by the ability to direct teaching to the resident's specific needs, and improving the quality of feedback. Fear of creating bias was the most commonly cited concern for engaging in forward feeding, followed by fear of violating confidentiality and difficulty maintaining confidentiality. Fear of litigation was the least common concern. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns, the majority of program directors feel that faculty should and do engage in forward feeding. Our study confirms the importance of clinical performance and professionalism as two important themes of information shared by attendings about residents.

Technology Use to Deliver Faculty Development: A CERA Study.

INTRODUCTION: Technology provides a platform to help address individualized training needs for community preceptors who are separated from the campus and pressured to achieve clinical productivity goals. This study explores technology use and support for delivering faculty development to community preceptors. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was part of the 2017 Council of Academic Family Medicine's (CAFM) Educational Research Alliance (CERA) annual survey of family medicine clerkship directors in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: The majority of respondents (n=62, 68.9%) agreed or strongly agreed that "using technology is critical to the successful delivery of faculty development to community preceptors." Only one-third (n=31) agreed or strongly agreed that their institution offers them adequate support to create and deliver technology-mediated faculty development or offers adequate support to community preceptors for accessing and using technology. CONCLUSIONS: Clerkship directors need institutional support to provide effective faculty development to preceptors via technology. The opportunity exists for institutions, national organizations, and professions to collaborate across disciplines and health professions on technology-based faculty development to support a level of quality and engagement for faculty development that is consistent with the levels we bring to student education.

Text Messaging as a Teaching Tool in a Family Medicine Clerkship Rotation.

INTRODUCTION: Today's learners use multiple forms of social communication, such as text messaging, that offer a promising teaching tool for medical education. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a diabetes care curriculum delivered through text messages for third-year medical students on a rural family medicine clerkship. METHODS: A pilot study of 119 participants were compared in a parallel group randomized controlled trial evaluating medical student learning and satisfaction with text messages throughout rotation compared to an email with the same content in their first week of rotation. Participants completed a 10-question multiple-choice test and six survey questions upon completing the rotation. The primary outcome was a difference between test scores among the two groups, and student satisfaction with the educational intervention was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 85 participants successfully completed the study protocol (34 text messages and 51 email) and were included in a per protocol analysis. The average number of correct responses per test was 3.32 (SD 1.29) in the texting group and 3.69 (SD 1.53) in the email group (P=0.259). Student satisfaction with text messages was 3.68 (SD 0.87) compared to email at 2.02 (SD 0.95) when rating the educational intervention on a 1 to 5 Likert scale (1=poor, 3=average, and 5=excellent). CONCLUSIONS: Participant knowledge on a challenging posttest was not improved with text messages compared to an email in this pilot study. Satisfaction with text messages was primarily positive. Further study is needed to determine the effectiveness of this content delivery method.

Institutional NIH Research Funding and a Culture of Support for Family Medicine-Their Relationship to Family Medicine Specialty Choice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The United States suffers from a low proportion of medical students pursuing family medicine (FM). Our objective was to examine institutional characteristics consistent with a focus on National Institutes of Health (NIH) research, institutional support for FM education, and the proportion of medical students choosing FM. METHODS: The 2015 CERA Survey of Family Medicine Clerkship Directors was merged with institutional NIH funding data from 2014 and medical student specialty choice in 2015. Institutional educational support was operationalized as (1) clerkship director's perception of medical school environment toward FM, and (2) amount of negative comments about FM made by faculty in other departments. The outcome was the percentage of students selecting FM. Bivariate statistics were computed. RESULTS: As NIH funding increases, the proportion of students entering FM decreases (r=-.22). Institutions with higher NIH funding had lower clerkship director perceptions of medical school support toward FM (r=-.38). Among private institutions, the negative correlation between NIH funding and the proportion of students entering FM strengthens to r=-.48, P=.001. As perceptions of support for FM increase, the proportion of students entering FM increase (r=.47). Among private schools, perceptions of support toward family medicine was strongly positively correlated with the proportion of students entering FM (r=.72, P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Higher institutional NIH funding is associated with less support for FM and lower proportions of students choosing FM. These issues appear to be even more influential in private medical schools. Understanding how to integrate the goals of NIH-level research and increasing primary care workforce so that both can be achieved is the next challenge.

The family medicine curriculum resource project structural framework.

BACKGROUND: In the original contract for the Family Medicine Curricular Resource Project (FMCRP), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Division of Medicine and Dentistry, charged the FMCRP executive committee with reviewing recent medical education reform proposals and relevant recent curricula to develop an analytical framework for the project. METHODS: The FMCRP executive and advisory committees engaged in a review and analysis of a variety of curricular reform proposals generated during the last decade of the 20th century. At the same time, in a separate and parallel process, representative individuals from all the family medicine organizations, all levels of learners, internal medicine and pediatric faculty, and the national associations of medical and osteopathic colleges (Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine) were involved in group discussions to identify educational needs for physicians practicing in the 21st century. RESULTS: After deliberation, a theoretical framework was chosen for this undergraduate medical education resource that mirrors the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies, a conceptual design originated for graduate medical education. DISCUSSION: In addition to reflecting the current environment calling for change and greater accountability in medical education, use of the ACGME competencies as the theoretical framework for the FMCR provides a continuum of focus between the two major segments of physician education: medical school and residency.

Family medicine clerkship curriculum: competencies and resources.

Funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) from 2000-2005, the Family Medicine Curriculum Resource Project (FMCRP) developed a set of resources to improve medical student education. As part of this project, the FMCRP Clerkship Workgroup created and organized resources for developing, teaching, and evaluating a family medicine clerkship. Using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies as the overarching structure, the organizational scheme incorporated family medicine principles and themes in covering core topics. This curricular resource was designed to be flexible and adaptable to different medical schools and curricular settings.

Family medicine curriculum resource project: overview.

In 2000, the Health Resources and Services Administration, in the interest of fostering curriculum reform in medical schools, awarded a 4-year contract to the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine to develop a curricular resource. The contract directed development of a multi-part resource aimed at (1) preclerkship prerequisites for third-year clerkships in collaboration with internal medicine and pediatrics, (2) the family medicine clerkship, (3) post-clerkship preparation for residency training, and (4) specific special topic areas of importance to the government. The Family Medicine Curriculum Resource (FMCR) was produced by primary care educators, with day-to-day direction from an executive committee and overall oversight by an advisory committee. The FMCR was built around a theoretical framework to link medical student competencies with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies for residency training. Considerable energy throughout development of the FMCR was devoted to obtaining input from potential end-user audiences through an active dissemination effort.

Family Medicine Curriculum Resource Project: the future.

Under contract to the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) created an undergraduate medical education curricular resource designed to train physicians to practice in the 21st century. An interdisciplinary group of more than 35 educators worked for 4 years to create the Family Medicine Curriculum Resource (FMCR). By consensus, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies were adopted as the theoretical framework for this project. The FMCR provides materials for the preclerkship years, the third-year family medicine clerkship, the postclerkship year, and faculty development, as well as guidance for integrating topics of special interest to the federal government (such as, geriatrics, Healthy People 2010, genetics, informatics) into a 4-year continuum of medical education. There are challenges inherent in implementing each component of the FMCR. For example, can the ACGME competency-based approach be adapted to undergraduate medical education? Can the densely packed preclerkship years be adapted to include more focused effort on developing these competencies, and whose job is it anyway? What is "core" to being a competent clinician, and what information can be obtained when needed from medical informatics sources? Will family medicine educators embrace the FMCR recommendations for their third-year clerkships? Will exit assessment of the competency levels of graduating medical students be achieved, and can it make them more capable residents? Can faculty in different clinical and educational settings integrate the teaching of "how to learn" into their repertoire? How will faculty development innovation progress in a time of increasing emphasis on clinical productivity? Developing a common language and adoption of core competencies for all levels of medical education is imperative in a society that is focusing on improving health care quality and outcomes. The FMCR Project has developed a curricular resource to assist medical educators in this task. The challenge for the future is to measure how the FMCR is used and to ascertain if it has an influence on better patient and system outcomes.

Faculty Development for Medical School Community-Based Faculty: A Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance Study Exploring Institutional Requirements and Challenges.

PURPOSE: Community-based faculty play a large role in training medical students nationwide and require faculty development. The authors hypothesized that positive relationships exist between clerkships paying preceptors and requiring faculty development, and between protected clerkship directors' time and delivering face-to-face preceptor training, as well as with the number or length of community-based preceptor visits. Through under standing the quantity, delivery methods, barriers, and institutional support for faculty development provided to community-based preceptors teaching in family medicine clerkships, best practices can be developed. METHOD: Data from the 2015 Council of Academic Family Medicine's Educational Research Alliance survey of Family Medicine Clerkship Directors were analyzed. The cross-sectional survey of clerkship directors is distributed annually to institutional representatives of U.S. and Canadian accredited medical schools. Survey questions focused on the requirements, delivery methods, barriers, and institutional support available for providing faculty development to community-based preceptors. RESULTS: Paying community-based preceptors was positively correlated with requiring faculty development in family medicine clerkships. The greatest barrier to providing faculty development was community-based preceptor time availability; however, face-to-face methods remain the most common delivery strategy. Many family medicine clerkship directors perform informal or no needs assessment in developing faculty development topics for community-based faculty. CONCLUSIONS: Providing payment to community preceptors may allow schools to enhance faculty development program activities and effectiveness. Medical schools could benefit from constructing a formal curriculum for faculty development, including formal preceptor needs assessment and program evaluation. Clerkship directors may consider recruiting and retaining community-based faculty by employing innovative faculty development delivery methods.