We surveyed all 49 graduates of the University of California, San Francisco, residency program in primary care internal medicine to determine whether they chose careers as general internists and whether training in ambulatory care at the expense of hospital-based medicine is adequate preparation for general internal medicine practice. Graduates rated adequacy of training and relevance to their current clinical practice of 87 content and skill areas on five-point Likert scales. Of the 44 respondents, 39 (89%) chose careers as general internists and five (11%) as subspecialty internists. Training in nine of 11 internal medicine disciplines (eg, cardiology) was rated as highly adequate, and the areas as highly relevant. For ten of 15 non-internal medicine areas (eg, ear, nose, and throat), mean relevance scores significantly exceeded adequacy scores, suggesting training underemphasis. Mean relevance scores also significantly exceeded adequacy scores for seven of 11 basic knowledge/skill areas (eg, patient interviewing) and 13 of 14 areas related to clinical practice (eg, quality assurance). We conclude that the vast majority of graduates of the University of California, San Francisco, primary care residency program became general internists and that, rather than feeling deficient in training in hospital-based medicine, graduates reported unmet needs for ambulatory-care experiences and skills related to general internal medicine practice.
Stephen J. McPhee, Thomas F. Mitchell, Steven A. Schroeder, Eliseo J. Perez-Stable, Andrew B. Bindman. Training in a Primary Care Internal Medicine Residency ProgramThe First Ten Years. JAMA. 1987;258(11):1491–1495. doi:10.1001/jama.1987.03400110073028