Rowland Kate, Epling John W, Guthmann Rick, Heidelbaugh Joel J, Johnson Martha, Luckey Georgia, Martin Robert
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Chicago, IL.
Department of Family and Community Medicine, Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, VA.
Fam Med. 2024 Aug 23;56(10):631-40. doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2024.895739.
Limited faculty development is a barrier to advancing evidence-based medicine (EBM) education. This study sought to describe program director perception of EBM culture in family medicine residency training and to assess the association among structured faculty roles, EBM curricula, and specific resident outcomes including publications in EBM.
Members of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine EBM collaborative drafted survey questions based on a literature review. The questions were electronically distributed in May 2023 to all US family medicine residency program directors who had not previously opted out by the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance within its study of family medicine program directors. We analyzed results using descriptive and comparative statistics.
The overall response rate was 44.7% (309/691). We found that 260/281 (92%) of program directors reported an EBM curriculum of some kind, and 253/281 (90%) of program directors agreed/strongly agreed that EBM was accepted by residents. Of the respondents, 72/281 (25.6%) reported that no specific faculty member was responsible for their EBM curriculum. Most program directors reported that less than 50% of residents will leave their programs with the ability to detect an error in original research (23.8%; 67/281), detect an important omission in an UpToDate article (16%; 45/281), or author a narrative review for American Family Physician (10%; 28/281).
Program directors reported strong acceptance of EBM among residents and a high prevalence of a formal curriculum. However, many lacked a specific faculty lead, and few reported that residents had strong EBM skills. This study identified gaps in residency training to support future EBM-skilled family physicians as well as concerns about pathways for the development of future EBM faculty.
有限的师资发展是推进循证医学(EBM)教育的一个障碍。本研究旨在描述项目主任对家庭医学住院医师培训中循证医学文化的看法,并评估结构化师资角色、循证医学课程与特定住院医师成果(包括循证医学方面的出版物)之间的关联。
家庭医学教师协会循证医学协作组的成员基于文献综述起草了调查问卷。这些问题于2023年5月以电子方式分发给所有美国家庭医学住院医师培训项目主任,这些主任此前未在学术家庭医学教育研究联盟理事会对家庭医学项目主任的研究中选择退出。我们使用描述性和比较性统计分析结果。
总体回复率为44.7%(309/691)。我们发现,281名项目主任中有260名(92%)报告有某种形式的循证医学课程,281名项目主任中有253名(90%)同意/强烈同意循证医学被住院医师所接受。在受访者中,281名中有72名(25.6%)报告没有特定的教员负责他们的循证医学课程。大多数项目主任报告说,不到50%的住院医师在离开项目时能够发现原创研究中的错误(23.8%;67/281)、发现UpToDate文章中的重要遗漏(16%;45/281)或为《美国家庭医生》撰写叙述性综述(10%;28/281)。
项目主任报告说住院医师对循证医学的接受程度很高,并且正式课程的普及率也很高。然而,许多项目缺乏特定的教员领导,很少有项目主任报告住院医师具备很强的循证医学技能。本研究确定了住院医师培训中的差距,以支持未来具备循证医学技能的家庭医生,同时也关注未来循证医学教员的发展途径。