Editorials

Education Research and Human Subject Protection: Crossing the IRB Quagmire and IRB 101

Two editorials offer guidance for authors on Institutional Review Board approval and human subject protection.

Commentaries

The Roots of Discontent: Understanding the Pressures of Psychiatric Emergency Training

In a commentary on McIlwrick et al (p. 26–30), Schlozman and Beresin further illuminate the challenges of emergency training for psychiatric residents. (p. 10–11)

Practice‐Based Learning and Improvement Curricula: A Critical Opportunity to Educate Future Physicians and Leaders

Varkey's commentary on Tomolo et al (p. 49–58) emphasizes practice‐based improvement as an important learning experience for physicians and future health system

• This corrects the article:

Mukta Panda, Norman A. Desbiens. An “Education for Life” Requirement to Promote Lifelong Learning in an Internal Medicine Residency Program. J Grad Med Educ. 2010;2(4):562–565.

The author information for the article “An ‘Education for Life’ Requirement to Promote Lifelong Learning in an Internal Medicine Residency Program” in JGME Volume 2, Issue 4 incorrectly identified the title and institutional role of both authors.

The corrected titles and institutional role are as follows:

Mukta Panda, MD, FACP

Professor and Chair, Department of Medicine

Program Director Transitional Year Program

University of Tennessee—College of Medicine Chattanooga, Tennessee

Abstract

Background

In a recent report, the Institute of Medicine recommended more restrictions on residents' working hours. Several problems exist with a system that places a weekly limit on resident duty hours: (1) it assumes the presence of a linear relationship between hours of work and patient safety; (2) it fails to consider differences in intensity among programs; and (3) it does not address increases in the scientific content of medicine, and it places the burden of enforcing the duty hour limits on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education.

Proposal

An innovative method of calculating credit hours for graduate medical education would shift the focus from “years of residency” to “hours of residency.” For example, internal medicine residents would be requested to spend 8640 hours of total training hours (assuming 60 hours per week for 48 weeks annually) instead of the traditional 3 years. This method of counting training hours is used by other professions, such as the Intern Development Program of the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. The proposed approach would allow residents and program directors to pace training based on individual capabilities. Standards for resident education should include the average number of patients treated in each setting (inpatient or outpatient). A possible set of “multipliers” based on these parameters, and possibly others such as resident evaluation, is devised to calculate the “final adjusted accredited hours” that count toward graduation.

Anticipated Benefits

Substituting “years of training” with “hours of training” may resolve many of the concerns with the current residency education model, as well as adapt to the demands of residents' personal lives. It also may allow residents to pace their training according to their capabilities and learning styles, and contribute to reflective learning and better quality education.

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate pediatric chief residents' responsibilities and determine how chief residents and program directors view the scope of the chief resident's role.

Survey

We distributed a 20-item survey to program directors and chief residents at all US pediatric residency programs. Questions pertained to activities performed and the level of importance of administrative, clinical, and educational activities. The survey also investigated motivating factors to become chief resident, future career plans, and level of job satisfaction.

Results

We received responses from 127 program directors and 101 chief residents. Of the chief residents, 98% (99/101) felt administrative tasks were very/somewhat important, followed by education, service, and research. Significantly more program directors than chief residents felt chiefs' overall workload was well balanced. Program directors gave higher ratings than chief residents on chief's ability to develop clinical skills (79% [95/121] versus 61% [61/100]) and manage stress and burnout (86% [104/121] versus 72% [72/100]). Future career plans for chief residents in decreasing order included fellowship, outpatient practice, academic practice, and working as a hospitalist. The most significant problems reported by the chief residents were lack of administrative support and lack of time spent in educational/clinical activities.

Conclusions

The chief resident role is primarily administrative, but program directors and chiefs feel teaching and clinical responsibilities also are important. Although the 2 groups agreed in many areas, program directors underestimated the administrative demands placed on the chief residents, and our findings suggest the chief resident role may be more fulfilling if the balance was shifted somewhat toward teaching and clinical responsibilities.

Abstract

Background

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements stipulate that psychiatry residents need to be educated in the area of emergency psychiatry. Existing research investigating the current state of this training is limited, and no research to date has assessed whether the ACGME Residency Review Committee requirements for psychiatry residency training are followed by psychiatry residency training programs.

Methods

We administered, to chief resident attendees of a national leadership conference, a 24‐item paper survey on the types and amount of emergency psychiatry training provided by their psychiatric residency training programs. Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis.

Results

Of 154 surveys distributed, 111 were returned (72% response rate). Nearly one‐third of chief resident respondents indicated that more than 50% of their program's emergency psychiatry training was provided during on‐call periods. A minority indicated that they were aware of the ACGME program requirements for emergency psychiatry training. While training in emergency psychiatry occurred in many programs through rotations—different from the on‐call period—direct supervision was available during on‐call training only about one‐third of the time.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that about one‐third of psychiatry residency training programs do not adhere to the ACGME standards for emergency psychiatry training. Enhanced knowledge of the ACGME requirements may enhance psychiatry residents' understanding on how their programs are fulfilling the need for more emergency psychiatry training. Alternative settings to the on‐call period for emergency psychiatry training are more likely to provide for direct supervision.