Search

When it struck the US Gulf Coast in 2005, Hurricane Katrina severely disrupted many graduate medical education residency/fellowship programs in the region and the training of hundreds of residents/fellows. Despite the work of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in responding to this natural disaster and facilitating communication and transfer of residents/fellows to other unaffected training programs, the storm exposed the gaps in the existing system. Subsequently, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, with the aid of its member organizations, including the American Medical Association, developed a new disaster recovery plan to allow for a more rapid, effective response to future catastrophic events. These policies were instrumental in the rapid relocation of 597 residents/fellows from the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston after the landfall of Hurricane Ike in September 2008. As a further accommodation to affected trainees, medical certification boards should be as flexible as possible in waiving continuity requirements in the event of a disaster that affects residency/fellowship programs.

One of the most important challenges in resident education is to train residents how to function in relation to managed care companies and systems so as to enhance the quality, accessibility, and efficiency of health care. Since 1996, The University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston has presented an annual half-day seminar on managed care to new residents. The format involves training sessions and didactic presentations aimed at small groups (led by faculty physicians and nonphysicians from throughout the medical and managed care establishments). Problem-based learning sessions conducted in these groups focus on topics such as the organization of managed care systems, access, network, admit versus observation, inpatient status, denials, avoidable hospital days, concurrent reviews, gatekeepers, referrals, behavioral health, disease management programs, and financial considerations. Pretests and posttests are given to those participating to gauge the effectiveness of the program. In addition, participants complete evaluation forms that can be used by program coordinators to assess resident satisfaction with the learning format and to determine what improvements can be made in the process. For the 1999 and 2000 seminars, posttest results were significantly higher than pretest results for the new residents who participated in the seminar. Each year, seminar evaluations show that the small-group format is well received. We conclude that the small-group learning format is effective and enjoyable for the residents and their leaders. The format necessitates the training of 30 group leaders to increase their knowledge of managed care systems.

Study Objective: To determine the usefulness of screening reviews of the cardiopulmonary and gastrointestinal systems during medical admissions., Design: Case series., Setting: General internal medicine ward of a university hospital., Patients: 550 consecutive medical patients were initially screened at admission. The authors excluded 265 patients with life-limiting medical conditions, and they studied 98 patients with no known cardiopulmonary disease and 207 patients with no known gastrointestinal disease., Interventions: Positive responses to screening systems review questions were evaluated using a standardized testing algorithm., Main Outcome Measures: Numbers of new diagnoses; potential for patient benefit., Main Results: The authors made 26 new diagnoses for 25 patients (95% confidence limits, 16 to 37 patients), two of whom may have gained years of life as a result., Conclusions: The absolute yield of the screening cardiopulmonary and gastrointestinal reviews of systems of 550 patients admitted to an internal medicine service of a university hospital was a new diagnosis in about 5% of patients. An estimate of the cost-effectiveness compares favorably with those of other accepted screening practices.

Clinical performance of residents should be assessed as reliably and validly as possible. This study investigated the reliability and validity of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for assessing clinical performance of internal medicine residents. Residents were required to take a 17-patient OSCE in their first and second year. Reliability of the OSCE was 0.40. Validity studies indicated second-year students were significantly better than third-year students for five of six OSCE skill scores; first-year students were significantly better for three scores. Resident's scores for diagnosis, plan, and total significantly increased on their second OSCE. Generally faculty overall ratings of residents' clinical performance did not correlate with OSCE scores. American Board of Internal Medicine certifying examination scores were consistently positively correlated only with diagnosis. This 17-case OSCE is a feasible method for obtaining moderately reliable, valid data not available from other sources about the clinical performance of residents. More cases should be added to increase its reliability.

Studies repeatedly have shown the clinical performance of students and residents to be less than expected by faculty. Because evaluation methods substantially influence education, poor performance can be improved with better clinical evaluation methods. This study evaluated a standardized method to measure clinical performance in which trained actual and simulated patients were organized in a multiple-station format for efficient testing of examinees on 17 cases in less than four hours. Specific checklists completed by patients and predetermined scoring protocols yielded reliable data and reduced faculty time. Data from 204 students in three clerkships were consistent with previous research showing case specificity and substantial case-to-case variability. As a group however, the students' overall total scores were very similar. This suggests that clinical education is inconsistent and that a profile of an examinee's performance is more accurate than a single overall score. Validity of this standardized clinical examination was supported by significant but moderate correlations with faculty ratings of ward performance and the medicine subtest of the National Board of Medical Examiners test, part II. Direct per-student costs were $21.00. This standardized objective examination of clinical skills is feasible for use in training programs and will provide reliable and valid data on clinical performance not available through typical methods.