Recruitment of house staff into anesthesiology: a longitudinal evaluation of factors responsible for selecting a career in anesthesiology and an individual training program.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To re-evaluate factors responsible for selecting a career in anesthesiology and for selecting an anesthesiology training program. The perceptions of anesthesiology residents about employment opportunities and future job security were also re-examined. Novel data on the impact of duty hour restrictions on residency training were obtained.

DESIGN

Survey instrument.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

SUBJECTS

63 residents enrolled in the anesthesiology residency at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN (clinical base year and clinical anesthesia years 1-3) during the 2010-11 academic year. All responses were anonymous.

MEASUREMENTS

Current study data were compared to data from two similar studies published by the authors (1995-96 and 2000-01) using an f-exact test. A P-value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.

MAIN RESULTS

55 of 63 (87%) residents responded to the survey. The most frequently cited reasons for selecting a career in anesthesiology were: anesthesiology is a "hands-on" specialty (49%), critical care medicine is included in the scope of training/practice (33%), anesthesiology provides opportunities to perform invasive procedures (31%), and the work is immediately gratifying (31%). When current data were compared with data from the 1995-96 survey, respondents reported significant decreases in interest in physiology/pharmacology (42% vs 21%; P = 0.03), opportunities to conduct research (13% vs 2%; P = 0.05) and opportunities to train in pain medicine (13% vs 0%; P = 0.01) as reasons for selecting anesthesiology. When current data were compared with data from the 2000-2001 survey, respondents reported a significant increase in critical care medicine (7% vs 33%, P = 0.01), significant decreases in time off (36% vs 11%; P = 0.01) and work time mostly devoted to patient care (20% vs 2%; P = 0.01) as factors in selecting anesthesiology as a career. Nearly all (94%) respondents reported a high level of satisfaction with their specialty choice and would choose anesthesiology again if currently graduating medical school. When current data were compared with those from the 2000-2001 survey, a significant increase in respondents who anticipated difficulty securing employment (0% vs 14%; P = 0.01) was noted. However, anticipation of difficulty in securing employment remained significantly lower than what was reported on the 1995-96 survey (54% vs 14%; P = 0.01). Thirty-eight percent of residents reported that implementation of duty hour restrictions had a positive impact on resident education, and 43% of residents reported that duty hour restrictions improved their quality of life. However, most respondents (69%) did not support further duty hour restrictions, and many (43%) expected to work longer hours after graduation.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents in this study remain highly satisfied with anesthesiology as a career choice and with their training program. However, a resurgence of concern about employment after program completion and about future job security is apparent. The impact of critical care medicine training has significantly increased as a factor in selecting anesthesiology as a career, and the impact of training in pain medicine has significantly decreased. Although work hour restrictions were viewed as having a positive impact on training and well-being by 48% of residents, a majority of respondents in this study (76%) disagreed with further duty hour restrictions.