Iglehart J
Acad Med. 1998 Sep;73(9):956-61. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199809000-00013.
At the fourth meeting of the AAMC's Forum on the Future of Academic Medicine in December 1997, Dr. Paul Griner and Dr. David Blumenthal discussed findings from their in-depth case studies of how ten academic medical centers (AMCs) were responding to the changing, more competitive marketplace and what these AMCs were doing to sustain the missions of their medical schools and teaching hospitals. Rapid, wide-ranging internal changes are taking place, such as centralizing management, down-sizing operations, partnering or merging with other schools or hospitals, revising legal relationships to state governments (for public schools and hospitals), creating independent corporations, and increasing alliances with industry. But AMCs will not be able to sustain their vital balancing act between academia and the health care system unless they can develop ways that both enlist faculty to meet the demands of the marketplace and also protect academic productivity. Reforms in faculty governance are taking place, dealing especially with issues of reciprocal AMC-faculty accountability. Robert Z. Gussin, vice president for science and technology of Johnson & Johnson, then spoke concerning how his vast company was dealing with changing conditions, and discussed the relationships, roles, opportunities, and problems of academia and industry in carrying out pharmaceutical research. Members then discussed the future of biomedical research funding, which was seen as being reasonably stable and a beneficiary of industry's partnering with AMCs and increased federal support. The meeting closed with a continuation of an earlier meeting's inquiry about the characteristics of the ideal medical school in the next century and what barriers would be faced in reaching this ideal. The group agreed again that service to society should remain schools' major goal, and they described and discussed several barriers to change, many of them internal. The group had a number of suggestions about dealing with the barriers, but there was no consensus. The members did agree, however, that the forum discussions are worthwhile, and one participant urged that in planning for the future the AAMC broaden its agenda, since the core values of medicine, nursing, and public health all relate to the AAMC's mission.
1997年12月,在医学教育联络委员会(AAMC)学术医学未来论坛的第四次会议上,保罗·格里纳博士和大卫·布卢门撒尔博士讨论了他们对十家学术医疗中心(AMC)如何应对不断变化且竞争日益激烈的市场,以及这些学术医疗中心为维持其医学院和教学医院使命所采取措施的深入案例研究结果。迅速而广泛的内部变革正在发生,比如集中管理、精简运营、与其他学校或医院建立合作关系或合并、修订与州政府的法律关系(针对公立学校和医院)、创建独立公司以及加强与行业的联盟。但是,除非学术医疗中心能够找到既能促使教师满足市场需求又能保护学术生产力的方法,否则它们将无法维持在学术界和医疗保健系统之间至关重要的平衡。教师治理方面的改革正在进行,尤其涉及学术医疗中心与教师相互问责的问题。强生公司负责科技事务的副总裁罗伯特·Z·古辛随后谈到了他的大型公司如何应对不断变化的形势,并讨论了学术界和产业界在开展药物研究中的关系、角色、机遇和问题。成员们接着讨论了生物医学研究资金的未来,大家认为其前景较为稳定,并且会受益于产业界与学术医疗中心的合作以及联邦政府支持的增加。会议结束时,继续了前一次会议关于下个世纪理想医学院的特征以及实现这一理想将面临哪些障碍的探讨。该小组再次一致认为,服务社会应始终是医学院的主要目标,他们描述并讨论了一些变革障碍,其中许多是内部障碍。小组成员就应对这些障碍提出了一些建议,但未达成共识。不过成员们确实一致认为,论坛讨论是有价值的,一名与会者敦促医学教育联络委员会在规划未来时拓宽其议程,因为医学、护理和公共卫生的核心价值观都与医学教育联络委员会的使命相关。