A Comparison of Residency Applications and Match Performance in 3-Year vs 4-Year Family Medicine Training Programs.


Journal

Family medicine
ISSN: 1938-3800
Titre abrégé: Fam Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8306464

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Historique:
entrez: 12 9 2019
pubmed: 12 9 2019
medline: 31 1 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The optimal length of residency training in family medicine is under debate. This study compared applicant type, number of applicants, match positions filled, matched applicant type, and ranks to fill between 3-year (3YR) and 4-year (4YR) residencies. The Length of Training Pilot (LOTP) is a case-control study comparing 3YR (seven residencies) and 4YR (six residencies) training models. We collected applicant and match data from LOTP programs from 2012 to 2018 and compared data between 3YR and 4YR programs. National data provided descriptive comparisons. An annual resident survey captured resident perspectives on training program selection. Summary statistics and corresponding t-tests and χ2 tests of independence were performed to assess differences between groups. We used a linear mixed model to account for repeated measures over time within programs. There were no differences in the mean number of US MD, US DO, and international medical graduate applicants between 3YR and 4YR programs. Both the 3YR and 4YR programs had a substantially higher number of US MD and DO applicants compared to national averages. The percentages of positions filled in the match and positions filled by US MDs, DOs and IMGs were not different between groups. The percentage of residents in 4YR programs who think training in family medicine requires a fourth year varied significantly during the study period, from 35% to 25% (P<.001). The predominant reasons for pursuing training in a 4YR program was a desire for more flexibility in training and a desire to learn additional skills beyond clinical skills. The applicant pool and match performance of the residencies in the LOTP was not affected by length of training. Questions yet to be addressed include length of training's impact on medical knowledge, scope of practice, and clinical preparedness.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
The optimal length of residency training in family medicine is under debate. This study compared applicant type, number of applicants, match positions filled, matched applicant type, and ranks to fill between 3-year (3YR) and 4-year (4YR) residencies.
METHODS METHODS
The Length of Training Pilot (LOTP) is a case-control study comparing 3YR (seven residencies) and 4YR (six residencies) training models. We collected applicant and match data from LOTP programs from 2012 to 2018 and compared data between 3YR and 4YR programs. National data provided descriptive comparisons. An annual resident survey captured resident perspectives on training program selection. Summary statistics and corresponding t-tests and χ2 tests of independence were performed to assess differences between groups. We used a linear mixed model to account for repeated measures over time within programs.
RESULTS RESULTS
There were no differences in the mean number of US MD, US DO, and international medical graduate applicants between 3YR and 4YR programs. Both the 3YR and 4YR programs had a substantially higher number of US MD and DO applicants compared to national averages. The percentages of positions filled in the match and positions filled by US MDs, DOs and IMGs were not different between groups. The percentage of residents in 4YR programs who think training in family medicine requires a fourth year varied significantly during the study period, from 35% to 25% (P<.001). The predominant reasons for pursuing training in a 4YR program was a desire for more flexibility in training and a desire to learn additional skills beyond clinical skills.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The applicant pool and match performance of the residencies in the LOTP was not affected by length of training. Questions yet to be addressed include length of training's impact on medical knowledge, scope of practice, and clinical preparedness.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31509215
doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2019.558529
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

641-648

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Auteurs

M Patrice Eiff (MP)

Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR.

Annie Ericson (A)

Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.

Elaine Waller Uchison (EW)

Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.

Steele Valenzuela (S)

Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.

Miguel Marino (M)

Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.

Karen Mitchell (K)

American Academy of Family Physicians, Division of Medical Education, Leawood, KS.

Patricia A Carney (PA)

Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH