Kiel D P, O'Sullivan P S, Ellis P J, Wartman S A
Division of General Internal Medicine, Brown University Program in Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island.
J Gen Intern Med. 1991 Nov-Dec;6(6):544-52. doi: 10.1007/BF02598225.
To evaluate a primary care internal medicine curriculum, the authors surveyed four years (1983-1986) of graduates of the primary care and traditional internal medicine residency programs at their institution concerning the graduates' preparation.
Mailed survey of alumni of a residency training program.
Teaching hospital alumni.
SUBJECTS/METHODS: Of 91 alumni of an internal medicine training program for whom addresses had been found, 82 (90%) of the residents (20 primary care and 62 traditional) rated on a five-point Likert scale 82 items for both adequacy of preparation for practice and importance of training. These items were divided into five groups: traditional medical disciplines (e.g., cardiology), allied disciplines (e.g., orthopedics), areas related to medical practice (e.g., patient education), basic skills and knowledge (e.g., history and physical), and technical procedures.
Primary care residents were more likely to see themselves as primary care physicians versus subspecialists (84% versus 45%). The primary care graduates felt significantly better prepared in the allied disciplines and in areas related to medical practice (p less than 0.01). There was no significant difference overall in perceptions of preparation in the traditional medical disciplines, basic skills and knowledge, and procedures. The same results were obtained when the authors looked only at graduates from the two programs who spent more than 50% of their time as primary care physicians versus subspecialists. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the perceived importance of these areas to current practice.
These results suggest that the primary care curriculum has prepared residents in areas particularly relevant to primary care practice. Additionally, these individuals feel as well prepared as do their colleagues in the traditional medical disciplines, basic skills and knowledge, and procedural skills.
为评估一门初级保健内科课程,作者对其所在机构四年(1983 - 1986年)的初级保健和传统内科住院医师培训项目的毕业生就他们的准备情况进行了调查。
对住院医师培训项目校友进行邮寄调查。
教学医院校友。
研究对象/方法:在91名已找到地址的内科培训项目校友中,82名(90%)住院医师(20名初级保健医师和62名传统内科医师)采用五点李克特量表对82项关于实践准备充分性和培训重要性的内容进行评分。这些项目分为五组:传统医学学科(如心脏病学)、相关学科(如骨科)、与医疗实践相关的领域(如患者教育)、基本技能和知识(如病史和体格检查)以及技术操作。
与专科医师相比,初级保健住院医师更倾向于将自己视为初级保健医师(84%对45%)。初级保健毕业生在相关学科和与医疗实践相关的领域感觉准备得明显更好(p < 0.01)。在传统医学学科、基本技能和知识以及操作方面,总体上对准备情况的认知没有显著差异。当作者仅观察两个项目中超过50%的时间从事初级保健工作的毕业生与专科医师时,也得到了相同的结果。两组在这些领域对当前实践的重要性认知上没有显著差异。
这些结果表明初级保健课程在与初级保健实践特别相关的领域使住院医师做好了准备。此外,这些人在传统医学学科、基本技能和知识以及操作技能方面感觉与他们的同事准备得一样充分。