“What Program Directors Think” III: Results of the 2014/2015 Annual Surveys of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR)

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Anna Rozenshtein ; MD ; MPH^a ; ^{ar250@columbia.edu" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Darel E. Heitkamp ; MD^b ; Tan Lucien H. Muhammed ; MD^c ; Joyce S. Sclamberg ; MD^d ; Angelisa M. Paladin ; MD^e ; Stacy E. Smith ; MD^f ; Jeremy B. Nguyen ; MD^g ; Mark Robbin ; MD^h
• 关键词：ABR Core Examination ; ACGME Milestones ; Non-Interpretative Skills Curriculum ; radiology resident recruitment ; radiology residency training
• 刊名：Academic Radiology
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：July 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：23
• 期：7
• 页码：861-869
• 全文大小：832 K

文摘

The Association of Program Directors in Radiology regularly surveys its members regarding issues of importance to support radiology residency programs and their directors.

Materials and Methods

This is an observational cross-sectional study using two Web-based surveys posed to the Association of Program Directors in Radiology membership in the fall of 2014 (49 items) and the spring of 2015 (46 items) on the subjects of importance to the members, including the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education Milestones, the Non-Interpretative Skills Curriculum, the American Board of Radiology Core Examination, the effect of the new resident testing and program accreditation paradigms on training outcomes, the 2015 Residency Match, the Interventional Radiology/Diagnostic Radiology (IR/DR) Residency, and Program Director (PD)/Program Coordinator resources.

Results

Responses were collected electronically, results were tallied using SurveyMonkey software, and qualitative responses were tabulated or summarized as comments. Findings were reported during the 63rd annual meeting of the Association of University Radiologists. The maximal response rate was 33% in the fall of 2014 and 36% in the spring of 2015.

Conclusions

PDs believed that the radiology Milestones, now largely implemented, did not affect overall resident evaluation, was not reflective of resident experience, and actually made evaluation of residents more difficult. PDs also felt that although the American Board of Radiology oral examination had been a better test for clinical practice preparedness, their new residents knew at least as much as before. There was little evidence of recall reemergence. The radiology training community saw a drop in residency applicant quality as demonstrated by the United States Medical Licensing Examination scores and clinical rotation grades. Because the new IR/DR Residency positions were to be funded at the expense of the traditional DR positions, the majority of PDs expected a negative effect of the impending IR/DR match on their DR recruitment. PDs were in favor of a unified clinical radiology curriculum similar to the Radiological Society of North America online physics modules.