Mulvey H J, Ogle-Jewett E A, Cheng T L, Johnson R L
Future of Pediatric Education II (FOPE II) Project, American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007-1098, USA.
Pediatrics. 2000 Aug;106(2 Pt 1):323-9. doi: 10.1542/peds.106.2.323.
On February 1, 1997, new pediatric Residency Review Committee guidelines became effective. Eighteen months later, pediatric residency program directors were queried regarding the implementation of these guidelines. Because both the challenge to implement these guidelines and the opportunities to shape pediatric graduate medical education rest with the program directors, obtaining the feedback and suggestions from this group is seen as the keystone of future planning endeavors.
A 20-question multiple-choice/opened-ended questionnaire was sent to the 201 members of the Association of Pediatric Program Directors in 2 mailings in August and September 1998.
A final response rate of 70% was achieved. Very few program directors reported difficulties in instituting the new residency review committee requirements. The exceptions to this pattern were those requirements pertaining to limitations on time spent in intensive care experience and in the neonatal intensive care unit, wherein 34% of the respondents identified barriers. Although the majority of respondents regarded these requirements as very good or sufficient, some program directors expressed concern regarding insufficient amounts of time available for preparation in intensive care (18%), neonatal intensive care unit (22%), behavioral/developmental pediatrics (16%), and in adolescent medicine (13%). In general, programs have been more successful in defining new competencies than in developing curricula to teach them. The majority of respondents also indicated that their residents' exposure was excellent or satisfactory in all 6 of the following practice settings: private office-based practice for continuity clinic, private office-based practice for outpatient rotation, predominately managed care practice, community clinics for continuity clinic, community clinics for outpatient rotation, and hospital-based practice for continuity clinic. They also indicated that they had no serious concerns about the types of career development assistance offered to residents and the types of follow-up tracking of residents.
The findings from this survey have reaffirmed the merit of the current system of pediatric residency education. They have also revealed the commitment of program directors to address the complex issues generated by the evolution of health care delivery, and thereby contribute to the optimal provision of pediatric health care now and in the future.
1997年2月1日,新的儿科住院医师评审委员会指南开始生效。18个月后,对儿科住院医师培训项目主任就这些指南的实施情况进行了询问。由于实施这些指南的挑战以及塑造儿科毕业后医学教育的机会都落在项目主任身上,因此从这个群体中获得反馈和建议被视为未来规划工作的关键。
1998年8月和9月分两次向儿科项目主任协会的201名成员发送了一份包含20个问题的多项选择题/开放式问卷。
最终回复率达到70%。很少有项目主任报告在实施新的住院医师评审委员会要求方面存在困难。这种模式的例外情况是那些与重症监护经验和新生儿重症监护病房的时间限制相关的要求,其中34%的受访者指出了障碍。尽管大多数受访者认为这些要求非常好或足够,但一些项目主任对重症监护(18%)、新生儿重症监护病房(22%)、行为/发育儿科学(16%)和青少年医学(13%)准备时间不足表示担忧。总体而言,项目在界定新能力方面比开发教授这些能力的课程更为成功。大多数受访者还表示,他们的住院医师在以下6种实践环境中的接触情况非常好或令人满意:连续性诊所的私人门诊实践、门诊轮转的私人门诊实践、主要的管理式医疗实践、连续性诊所的社区诊所、门诊轮转的社区诊所以及连续性诊所的医院实践。他们还表示,他们对提供给住院医师的职业发展援助类型以及住院医师的后续跟踪类型没有严重担忧。
本次调查结果重申了当前儿科住院医师教育系统的优点。它们还揭示了项目主任致力于解决医疗保健服务演变所产生的复杂问题,从而为现在和未来的儿科医疗保健的优化提供做出贡献。