Evaluation of Family Medicine Residency Programs for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Milestones.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In 2020, the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD) Diversity and Health Equity (DHE) Task Force developed and piloted a framework to measure diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in medical residencies across five domains: curriculum, evaluation, institution, resident pathway, and faculty pathway. The objectives were (1) to measure DEI initiatives across multiple domains in family medicine residencies using the DEI milestones and (2) to obtain current national baseline data providing criteria against which to measure effectiveness of initiatives and create tailored benchmarks. METHODS: We developed a cross-sectional survey of 12 quantitative residency characteristic items and the five DEI milestone ratings, and distributed the survey to program directors of family medicine residencies accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in the spring of 2022. We generated descriptive statistics, including item frequencies and cross-tabulations, and completed subgroup comparisons with analysis of variance. RESULTS: We collected aggregate milestone data for 194 family medicine residencies of 588 eligible programs (33% response rate). Respondents represented 48 states and US territories: 107 community-based, university-affiliated; 48 community-based; 34 university-based; and 5 military/other programs. Overall, the curriculum milestone was rated the highest (mean=2.54, SD=1.03), whereas the faculty pathway (mean=1.94, SD=1.04) and resident pathway (mean=2.02, SD=1.06) milestones were rated lowest. CONCLUSIONS: DEI milestone data may support residency programs as they assess their institution's developmental progress across five key domains. Additionally, aggregate data may shed light on collective strengths and areas for improvement.

Resident Involvement in Curricular and Clinical Practice Change and Satisfaction With Training According to Length of Training in Family Medicine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Most research in residency training has focused on quality improvement within a single program. We explored resident involvement in curricular and clinical practice change, the learning environment, and resident satisfaction in 3-year family medicine residencies compared to matched 4-year residencies. METHODS: We used two surveys to capture data. One was for program directors, which assessed the level of resident involvement in curricular and practice transformation. The second was a resident survey, which asked residents to rate their involvement in curricular change and practice transformation, the learning environment, and satisfaction with training. Both were administered annually between 2013 and 2019. Response rates ranged from 84.6% to 100%. RESULTS: Findings revealed no overall difference in resident involvement in curricular change, but the program director survey findings indicated that a higher proportion of residents in 4-year programs were using a broader diversity of approaches to working on quality improvement (QI) projects compared to those in 3-year programs. We also found statistical differences in the number of QI projects completed per year, with 34.1% completing three or more in 4-year programs compared to 13.3% in 3-year programs (P<.001). We found a positive correlation between resident involvement, learning environment, and satisfaction with training for both 3-year (range 0.489-0.666; P=.001) and 4-year residents (range 0.441-0.529; P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Four-year residents were involved in a greater number of quality improvement projects and had a more diverse profile of involvement than those in 3-year residency programs. Involvement in practice and curricular change and the learning environment were associated with greater levels of resident satisfaction with training in both 3-year and 4-year programs.

A Longitudinal Assessment of Resident and New Graduate Well-Being According to Length of Training: A Report From the Length of Training Pilot in Family Medicine.

Background & Objectives: No prior studies have examined how length of training may influence wellness. As part of the Length of Training Pilot (LoTP), we explored resident and new graduate well-being according to program year and length of training in 3- and 4-year family medicine residency training programs. METHODS: Two surveys captured data included in these analyses. One was a resident survey that included the Mayo Clinic physician-expanded Well-Being Index (eWBI) administered annually during the In-Training Examination (2014-2019). The second was administered to graduates 1 year after completion of training between 2016 and 2022 and included the same well-being questions. Response rates ranged between 77.7% and 96.8%. RESULTS: The eWBI summary scores for burnout were highest in postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) and did not differ statistically according to length of training (PGY1: 2.02 in 3-year [3YR] programs vs 1.93 in 4-year [4YR] programs, P=.55; postgraduate year 2 [PGY2]: 2.42 in 3YR programs vs 2.38 in 4YR programs, P=.83; postgraduate year 3 [PGY3]: 2.18 in 3YR programs vs 2.28 in 4YR programs, P=.59; and 2.34 in postgraduate year 4 [PGY4] for those in 4YR programs), though some statistical differences were noted for three items. New graduates' eWBI summary scores before the COVID-19 pandemic were 1.77 among 3YR graduates and 1.66 among 4YR graduates (P=.59). These scores were higher during COVID-19 at 1.89 for 3YR graduates and 2.02 for 4YR graduates (P=.62). Length of training was not associated with differences in well-being before or during COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: We found no associations between length of training and physician well-being during training or among new graduates before or during COVID-19.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Milestones: Creation of a Tool to Evaluate Graduate Medical Education Programs.

Background: As the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) began to ask programs to report their efforts surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), program directors felt ill prepared to evaluate their programs and measure change. Objective: To develop a tool that would allow graduate medical education (GME) programs to evaluate the current state of DEI within their residencies, identify areas of need, and track progress; to evaluate feasibility of using this assessment method within family medicine training programs; and to analyze and report pilot data from implementation of these milestones within family medicine residency programs. Methods: The Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD) Diversity and Health Equity (DHE) Task Force developed a tool for program DEI evaluation modeled after the ACGME Milestones. These milestones focus on DEI assessment in 5 key domains: Institution, Curriculum, Evaluation, Resident Personnel, and Faculty Personnel. After finalizing a draft, a pilot implementation of the milestones was conducted by a convenience sample of 10 AFMRD DHE Task Force members for their own programs. Results: Scores varied widely across surveyed programs for all milestones. Highest average scores were seen for the Curriculum milestone (2.65) and the lowest for the Faculty Personnel milestone (2.0). Milestone assessments were completed within 10 to 40 minutes using various methods. Conclusions: The AFMRD DEI Milestones were developed for program assessment, goal setting, and tracking of progress related to DEI within residency programs. The pilot implementation showed these milestones were easily used by family medicine faculty members in diverse settings.

Matching Our Mission: A Strategic Plan to Create a Diverse Family Medicine Residency.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Increasing the number of underrepresented minority (URM) physicians improves access and quality of care. URMs are more likely to practice primary care and work in underserved communities. The racial and ethnic diversity of family physicians lags behind the general population. To create a more diverse residency, the Boston Medical Center Family Medicine Residency Program (BMCFMRP) developed, implemented, and evaluated a strategic plan for diversity recruitment. METHODS: In academic year (AY) 2014-2015, we set goals to increase the number of URM applicants and the percentage of matched URMs. From 2014-2017, we implemented an intervention focused on: (1) increasing outreach to URM candidates, (2) revising interviews to minimize bias, and (3) analyzing recruitment data. RESULTS: From 2014-2017, the total number of URM applicants increased by 80% (61 to 110). Evaluating recruitment trends from 2010-2017, there was a statistically significant increase (P<0.001) in the percentage of URM applicants from 13.3% (29 of 218 total applicants) to 19.9% (110 of 402). There was also a significant increase (P=0.029) in the percentage of matched URMs. Before the intervention, the percentage ranged from 0% to 20% (2011: 0% [n=0/6], 2014: 0% [n=0/10], 2013: 20% [n=2/10]). During the intervention, the percentage ranged from 25% to 50% (2017: 25% [n=3/12], 2016: 50% [n=6/12]). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a strategic plan for diversity recruitment increased the number of URM applicants and the percentage of URMs matching into the BMCFMRP. Additional research is needed to determine if these strategies produce similar results in residency programs at other institutions and in other medical specialties.