Search

BackgroundIn the rapidly changing landscape of undergraduate medical education (UME), the roles and responsibilities of clerkship directors (CDs) are not clear.ObjectiveTo describe the current roles and responsibilities of Internal Medicine CDs.DesignNational annual Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) cross-sectional survey.ParticipantsOne hundred twenty-nine clerkship directors at all Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited US medical schools with CDIM membership as of September 1, 2017.Main measuresResponsibilities of core CDs, including oversight of other faculty, and resources available to CDs including financial support and dedicated time.Key resultThe survey response rate was 83% (107/129). Ninety-four percent of the respondents oversaw the core clerkship inpatient experience, while 47.7% (n = 51) and 5.6% (n = 6) oversaw the outpatient and longitudinal integrated clerkships respectively. In addition to oversight, CDs were responsible for curriculum development, evaluation and grades, remediation, scheduling, student mentoring, and faculty development. Less than one-third of CDs (n = 33) received the recommended 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) support for their roles, and 15% (n = 16) had less than 20% FTE support. An average 0.41 FTE (SD .2) was spent in clinical work and 0.20 FTE (SD .21) in administrative duties. Eighty-three percent worked with other faculty who assisted in the oversight of departmental UME experiences, with FTE support varying by role and institution. Thirty-five percent of CDs (n = 38) had a dedicated budget for managing their clerkship.ConclusionsThe responsibilities of CDs have increased in both number and complexity since the dissemination of previous guidelines for expectations of and for CDs in 2003. However, resources available to them have not substantially changed.

Abstract Background A Night Float (NF) system has been implemented by many institutions to address increasing concerns about residents' work hours. The purpose of our study was to examine the perceptions of residents towards a NF system. Methods A 115-item questionnaire was developed to assess residents' perceptions of the NF rotation as compared with a regular call month. The categories included patient care, education, medical errors, and overall satisfaction. Internal Medicine housestaff (post-graduate years 1–3) from three hospital settings at the University of Pittsburgh completed the questionnaire. Results The response rate was 90% (n = 149). Of these, 74 had completed the NF rotation. The housestaff felt that the quality of patient care was improved because of NF (41% agreed and 18% disagreed). A majority also felt that better care was provided by a rested physician in spite of being less familiar with the patient (46% agreed and 21% disagreed). Most felt that there was less emphasis on education (65%) and more emphasis on service (52%) during NF. Overall, the residents felt more rested during their call months (83%) and strongly supported the 80-hour workweek requirement (77%). Conclusion Housestaff felt that the overall quality of patient care was improved by a NF system. The perceived improved quality of care by a rested physician coupled with a perceived decrease in the emphasis on education may have significant implications in housestaff training.

Background: In the rapidly changing landscape of undergraduate medical education (UME), the roles and responsibilities of clerkship directors (CDs) are not clear.Objective: To describe the current roles and responsibilities of Internal Medicine CDs.Design: National annual Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) cross-sectional survey.Participants: One hundred twenty-nine clerkship directors at all Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited US medical schools with CDIM membership as of September 1, 2017.Main Measures: Responsibilities of core CDs, including oversight of other faculty, and resources available to CDs including financial support and dedicated time.Key Result: The survey response rate was 83% (107/129). Ninety-four percent of the respondents oversaw the core clerkship inpatient experience, while 47.7% (n = 51) and 5.6% (n = 6) oversaw the outpatient and longitudinal integrated clerkships respectively. In addition to oversight, CDs were responsible for curriculum development, evaluation and grades, remediation, scheduling, student mentoring, and faculty development. Less than one-third of CDs (n = 33) received the recommended 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) support for their roles, and 15% (n = 16) had less than 20% FTE support. An average 0.41 FTE (SD .2) was spent in clinical work and 0.20 FTE (SD .21) in administrative duties. Eighty-three percent worked with other faculty who assisted in the oversight of departmental UME experiences, with FTE support varying by role and institution. Thirty-five percent of CDs (n = 38) had a dedicated budget for managing their clerkship.Conclusions: The responsibilities of CDs have increased in both number and complexity since the dissemination of previous guidelines for expectations of and for CDs in 2003. However, resources available to them have not substantially changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]