Postresidency Practice Setting and Clinical Care Features According to 3 Versus 4 Years of Training in Family Medicine: A Length of Training Pilot Study.
M. P. Eiff, Annie Ericson, Dang H. Dinh, Steele Valenzuela, C. Conry, Alan B. Douglass, W. P. Dickinson, Stephanie E. Rosener, Patricia A. Carney
{"title":"Postresidency Practice Setting and Clinical Care Features According to 3 Versus 4 Years of Training in Family Medicine: A Length of Training Pilot Study.","authors":"M. P. Eiff, Annie Ericson, Dang H. Dinh, Steele Valenzuela, C. Conry, Alan B. Douglass, W. P. Dickinson, Stephanie E. Rosener, Patricia A. Carney","doi":"10.22454/fammed.2024.699625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES\nFactors associated with physician practice choice include residency location, training experiences, and financial incentives. How length of training affects practice setting and clinical care features postgraduation is unknown.\n\n\nMETHODS\nIn this Length of Training Pilot (LoTP) study, we surveyed 366 graduates of 3-year (3YR) and 434 graduates of 4-year (4YR) programs 1 year after completion of training between 2013 and 2021. Variables assessed included reasons for practice setting choice, practice type, location, practice and community size, specialty mix, and clinical care delivery features (eg, integrated behavioral health, risk stratified care management). We compared different length of training models using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables and independent samples, and t test (unequal variances) for continuous variables.\n\n\nRESULTS\nResponse rates ranged from 50% to 88% for 3YR graduates and 68% to 95% for 4YR graduates. Scope of practice was a predominant reason for graduates choosing their eventual practice, and salary was a less likely reason for those completing 4 years versus 3 years of training (scope, 72% vs 55%, P=.001; salary, 15% vs 22%, P=.028). Community size, practice size, practice type, specialty mix, and practice in a federally designated underserved site did not differ between the two groups. We found no differences in patient-centered medical home features when comparing the practices of 3YR to 4YR graduates.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nTraining length did not affect practice setting or practice features for graduates of LoTP programs. Future LoTP analyses will examine how length of training affects scope of practice and clinical preparedness, which may elucidate other elements associated with practice choice.","PeriodicalId":50456,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/fammed.2024.699625","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Factors associated with physician practice choice include residency location, training experiences, and financial incentives. How length of training affects practice setting and clinical care features postgraduation is unknown.
METHODS
In this Length of Training Pilot (LoTP) study, we surveyed 366 graduates of 3-year (3YR) and 434 graduates of 4-year (4YR) programs 1 year after completion of training between 2013 and 2021. Variables assessed included reasons for practice setting choice, practice type, location, practice and community size, specialty mix, and clinical care delivery features (eg, integrated behavioral health, risk stratified care management). We compared different length of training models using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables and independent samples, and t test (unequal variances) for continuous variables.
RESULTS
Response rates ranged from 50% to 88% for 3YR graduates and 68% to 95% for 4YR graduates. Scope of practice was a predominant reason for graduates choosing their eventual practice, and salary was a less likely reason for those completing 4 years versus 3 years of training (scope, 72% vs 55%, P=.001; salary, 15% vs 22%, P=.028). Community size, practice size, practice type, specialty mix, and practice in a federally designated underserved site did not differ between the two groups. We found no differences in patient-centered medical home features when comparing the practices of 3YR to 4YR graduates.
CONCLUSIONS
Training length did not affect practice setting or practice features for graduates of LoTP programs. Future LoTP analyses will examine how length of training affects scope of practice and clinical preparedness, which may elucidate other elements associated with practice choice.
期刊介绍:
Family Medicine, the official journal of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, publishes original research, systematic reviews, narrative essays, and policy analyses relevant to the discipline of family medicine, particularly focusing on primary care medical education, health workforce policy, and health services research. Journal content is not limited to educational research from family medicine educators; and we welcome innovative, high-quality contributions from authors in a variety of specialties and academic fields.