Family medicine residency program director expectations of procedural skills of medical school graduates.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mismatch between program directors' expectations of medical school graduates and the experience of students in medical school has important implications for patient safety and medical education. We sought to define family medicine residency program directors' expectations of medical school graduates to independently perform various procedural skills and medical school graduates' self-reported competence to perform those skills at residency outset. METHODS: In July of 2011, a paper-based survey was distributed nationwide by mail to 441 family medicine residency program directors and 3,287 medical school graduates enrolled as postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) residents in family medicine residency programs. Program director expectation of independent performance and recent medical school graduate self-reported ability to independently perform each of 40 procedures was assessed. RESULTS: Surveys were completed and returned from 186 program directors (response rate 42%) and 681 medical school graduates (response rate 21%). At least 66% of program directors expected interns to enter residency able to independently perform 15 of 40 procedures. More than 80% of new interns reported they were able to independently perform five of the 15 procedures expected by program directors. CONCLUSIONS: Incongruity exists between program director expectations and intern self-reported ability to perform common procedures. Both patient safety and medical education may be jeopardized by a mismatch of expectation and experience. Assessment of medical students prior to medical school graduation or at the start of residency training may help detect procedural skill gaps and protect patient safety.

Self-reported ability to perform procedures: a comparison of allopathic and international medical school graduates.

BACKGROUND: Graduates of US allopathic and international medical schools comprise the majority of physicians who began family medicine residency in July 2011. Different procedural skills may be taught in allopathic and international medical schools leading to variation in the procedures that graduates can perform independently at the beginning of residency training. A mismatch between assigned resident tasks and procedural skills mastered during medical school may jeopardize patient safety. METHODS: A survey was distributed nationwide to 3287 family medicine residents in July 2011 to determine the proportion of graduates of allopathic and international medical schools who self-reported the ability to perform each of 41 procedures independently. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 681 residents (response rate = 21%). The proportion of allopathic and international graduates self-reporting the ability to perform 7 ambulatory, 4 inpatient and 4 maternity care procedures was statistically significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: All graduates self-reported the ability to perform few procedural skills independently upon entry to residency. More allopathic graduates self-reported the ability to perform ambulatory procedures, whereas more international graduates self-reported the ability to perform inpatient and maternity care procedures. Evaluation of individual resident competencies is key to tailor patient care responsibilities and supervision appropriately to resident abilities.

Do residents want automated external defibrillators in their retirement home?

PURPOSE: The administration of a continuing care retirement community (CCRC), while weighing practical and ethical questions surrounding installation of automated external defibrillators (AEDs), wanted to consider resident opinions. No databased studies on this subject were found. DESIGN AND METHODS: After an information session about AEDs, CCRC residents were surveyed concerning their opinions on AED installation, their beliefs and concerns regarding AEDs, their advance directive status, and their demographic characteristics. Correlations were sought between choices about AED installation and beliefs, advance directives, and demographics. RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of 107 eligible residents participated. Twenty-seven percent wanted AEDs installed, 37% were not sure, 23% were opposed, and 11% did not answer this question. Univariate analysis showed that women, the widowed or single, and those with a college degree were more likely to oppose AEDs. In the best logistic regression (LR) model the hope that "AED use could be life saving" and the fears that "AED use might lead to a very poor quality of life" and that "AEDs might be misused" were more important than any demographic variables and only education remained in the model. Those opposing AEDs supplied powerful written comments to support their choice. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus and great indecision about AED installation among the residents of this CCRC. The subjects were somewhat older and more affluent than the typical retirement home population, pointing to the need for replicating the investigation with a larger and more diverse study population. However, these findings suggest that AED installation in a retirement home would be premature without engaging the entire community in discussions and education in a process considerate of the wishes of all residents, which are likely to be quite diverse.