Emerging Trends in the Prevalence of Military Medicine Interest Groups and Specialty Tracks at U.S. Medical Schools.

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Military Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1093/milmed/usae250

Donald P Keating Iii, Megan A Unrath, Rachel M Steffes, Timothy M Guenther, Bryan G Beutel

{"title":"Emerging Trends in the Prevalence of Military Medicine Interest Groups and Specialty Tracks at U.S. Medical Schools.","authors":"Donald P Keating Iii, Megan A Unrath, Rachel M Steffes, Timothy M Guenther, Bryan G Beutel","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usae250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: A challenge confronting health care is the national physician shortage, notably impacting the DoD's recruitment of military physicians. To address this, the Health Professions Scholarship Program is annually awarded to medical students to facilitate their transition into the U.S. Armed Forces. There is a glaring absence of military medical education in civilian schools to accommodate the unique interests of these students. While medical schools have adapted with interest groups and specialty tracks, the current presence of military medicine interest groups (MMIGs) and military medicine specialty tracks (MMSTs) remains under-explored. This study aimed to (1) update the prevalence of MMIGs in U.S. medical institutions, (2) identify the presence of MMSTs, and (3) compare military medicine involvement between allopathic and osteopathic programs.Methods: The study was approved for exempt status from the Kansas City University Institutional Review Board (study number 20,211,568-1). In a cross-sectional analysis, surveys were sent to 208 U.S. medical schools, with responses from student services or available public data from 200 institutions included in the final analysis. A secondary survey was sent to respondents who provided MMIG or MMST contacts.Results: Results indicated that 62% (n = 124/200) of schools currently have an established MMIG, a modest growth from 56% (n = 70/125) in 2015 (p = .14). MMST prevalence, however, is minimal at 2.5% (5/200). Osteopathic institutions demonstrated a significantly greater engagement in military medicine education (88.7%) compared to allopathic schools (52.4%) (p < .001).Conclusion: This research underscores the need for comprehensive military medical training in medical schools to meet the interests and career aspirations of their students. Future studies should also evaluate the efficacy of MMIGs and MMSTs in preparing students for military medical roles.","PeriodicalId":18638,"journal":{"name":"Military Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usae250","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

Introduction: A challenge confronting health care is the national physician shortage, notably impacting the DoD's recruitment of military physicians. To address this, the Health Professions Scholarship Program is annually awarded to medical students to facilitate their transition into the U.S. Armed Forces. There is a glaring absence of military medical education in civilian schools to accommodate the unique interests of these students. While medical schools have adapted with interest groups and specialty tracks, the current presence of military medicine interest groups (MMIGs) and military medicine specialty tracks (MMSTs) remains under-explored. This study aimed to (1) update the prevalence of MMIGs in U.S. medical institutions, (2) identify the presence of MMSTs, and (3) compare military medicine involvement between allopathic and osteopathic programs.

Methods: The study was approved for exempt status from the Kansas City University Institutional Review Board (study number 20,211,568-1). In a cross-sectional analysis, surveys were sent to 208 U.S. medical schools, with responses from student services or available public data from 200 institutions included in the final analysis. A secondary survey was sent to respondents who provided MMIG or MMST contacts.

Results: Results indicated that 62% (n = 124/200) of schools currently have an established MMIG, a modest growth from 56% (n = 70/125) in 2015 (p = .14). MMST prevalence, however, is minimal at 2.5% (5/200). Osteopathic institutions demonstrated a significantly greater engagement in military medicine education (88.7%) compared to allopathic schools (52.4%) (p < .001).

Conclusion: This research underscores the need for comprehensive military medical training in medical schools to meet the interests and career aspirations of their students. Future studies should also evaluate the efficacy of MMIGs and MMSTs in preparing students for military medical roles.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

美国医学院军事医学兴趣小组和专业方向的流行趋势。

导言：医疗保健面临的一项挑战是全国性的医生短缺问题，这尤其影响了国防部招募军医的工作。为解决这一问题，美国每年都会向医科学生颁发 "卫生职业奖学金计划"，以帮助他们向美国武装部队过渡。平民学校明显缺乏军事医学教育，无法满足这些学生的独特兴趣。虽然医学院已经通过兴趣小组和专业方向进行了调整，但目前军事医学兴趣小组（MMIGs）和军事医学专业方向（MMSTs）的存在仍未得到充分探索。本研究旨在：(1) 更新军事医学兴趣小组在美国医疗机构中的普遍程度；(2) 确定军事医学专业方向（MMST）的存在情况；(3) 比较全科医学和骨科医学项目在军事医学方面的参与情况：该研究获得了堪萨斯城大学机构审查委员会的豁免批准（研究编号 20,211,568-1）。在横断面分析中，我们向 208 所美国医学院校发送了调查问卷，最终分析包括了 200 所院校学生服务部门的回复或可获得的公共数据。对提供 MMIG 或 MMST 联系方式的受访者进行了二次调查：结果显示，62%（n = 124/200）的学校目前已建立了MMIG，与2015年的56%（n = 70/125）相比略有增长（p = .14）。然而，MMST 的流行率极低，仅为 2.5%（5/200）。与对抗疗法学校（52.4%）相比，整骨疗法机构在军事医学教育中的参与度明显更高（88.7%）（p 结论：这项研究强调，医学院需要开展全面的军事医学培训，以满足学生的兴趣和职业抱负。未来的研究还应评估 MMIGs 和 MMSTs 在培养学生适应军事医学角色方面的功效。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Military Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

8.30%

发文量

393

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Military Medicine is the official international journal of AMSUS. Articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed scientific papers, case reports, and editorials. The journal also publishes letters to the editor. The objective of the journal is to promote awareness of federal medicine by providing a forum for responsible discussion of common ideas and problems relevant to federal healthcare. Its mission is: To increase healthcare education by providing scientific and other information to its readers; to facilitate communication; and to offer a prestige publication for members’ writings.