Pediatric residency education: Is sports medicine getting its fair share?

Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.3). 02/2005; 115(1):28-33. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2004-0266
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Sports are the leading injury-related cause for pediatric primary care visits. Pediatric residency education guidelines suggest incorporating sports medicine (SM) education into curricula; however, research is lacking regarding effective teaching methods.
To assess reported US pediatric residency SM curricula, teaching methods, and resident evaluation of SM education.
Chief residents (CRs) and third-year residents (PL3s) from 100 randomly selected US Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited residency programs, stratified by size and geographic location, received surveys regarding programs' SM curriculum and teaching methods and individuals' methods for learning SM.
Response rates were 63% and 39% for CRs and PL3s, respectively. According to CRs, 34% of programs had no one in charge of their SM curriculum. Lecture (77%) was the primary method used for teaching SM. Hands-on teaching (37%) was used less frequently. CRs stated that 29% of programs did not include musculoskeletal examination teaching in their curriculums; 24% did not include formal teaching of concussion management, and 29% did not include reasons for medical disqualification. PL3s rated teaching of joint examinations and the preparticipation physical as the most poorly taught components of the physical examination. PL3s rated hands-on teaching and patient experience as the best methods for improving SM education. CRs reported that only 36% of programs have discussed incorporating more SM into their curriculum.
SM education is deficient in US pediatric residency programs. Standardized curricula should be developed with a focus on hands-on training as a means for teaching SM to pediatric residents.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Family physicians are expected to be comfortable in treating common sports injuries. Evidence shows a limited level of comfort in treating these injuries in pediatric and internal medicine residents. Studies are lacking, however, in family medicine residents. The purpose of this study is to assess the comfort level of family medicine residents in treating common sports injuries in adults and children based on their perceived level of knowledge and attitudes. This is a cross-sectional study of family medicine residents in the United Sates. A written survey of 25 questions related to sports injury knowledge and factors affecting comfort level were collected. A chi-square test was implemented in calculating P-values. Five hundred and fifty-seven residents responded to the survey. A higher percentage of doctors of osteopathy (86.6%, 82.5%, 69.6%, and 68.7%) compared to doctors of medicine (78.5%, 71.6%, 53.4%, and 52.8%) respectively identified ankle sprain, concussion, plantar fasciitis, and lateral epicondylitis as common injuries, and felt comfortable in treating them (P-values =0.015, 0.004, 0.0001, and 0.0002, respectively). Residents with high interest in sports medicine correctly identified the injuries as common and felt comfortable treating them as well (knowledge, P=0.027, 0.0029, <0.0001, and 0.0001, respectively; comfort level, P=0.0016, <0.0001, 0.0897, and 0.0010, respectively). Medical education background, factors that affect training, and an interest in sports medicine contribute to residents' knowledge and comfort level in treatment of common sports injuries.
    Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine 01/2015; 6:81-6. DOI:10.2147/OAJSM.S71457
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess whether primary care physicians, via referrals or other mechanisms, are now providing proportionally less care for children with specific common diagnoses, thus driving greater demand for specialist services. Secondary data analysis (1993-2001) from one of the largest commercial healthcare organizations in the United States. Evaluation and management (E/M) common procedural terminology (CPT) visit codes and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes pertaining to asthma, constipation, headache, and heart murmurs were selected. Visits were then assigned to the specialty of physician providing care. Significant differences between and among categories of physicians were tested using logistic regression. Overall, pediatrician generalists and specialists provided a greater proportion of E/M visits to children in 2001 than in 1993, compared with nonpediatrician providers. However, although the absolute increase in the proportion of all E/M visits by children <18 years of age to pediatrician generalists was greater than that of pediatrician subspecialists (4.77% vs 0.69%; P <.0001), the relative increase was much smaller for the generalists (8.9% vs 19.7%; P <.0001). Findings were consistent for most of the specific diagnoses examined. The increases in both the proportion and number of visits made to specialists has not been accompanied by a decrease in visits to generalists.
    Journal of Pediatrics 01/2005; 146(1):14-9. DOI:10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.08.054 · 3.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To determine how practicing physicians who graduated from internal medicine-pediatrics residency programs allocate their practice time and professional activities between adult and child patients, and to investigate whether there are predictors of the extent to which a particular physician's practice is more or less focused on one or the other of these patient groups. Method In 2003, the authors mailed a questionnaire to the 1,300 generalists and 472 subspecialists who, as of 2003, had completed internal medicine-pediatrics training since the inception of the program in 1980. Results The response rate was 73% for the generalists and 65% for the subspecialists. The vast majority of the generalist physicians stated that they provide care to all ages of patients. However, the proportion of care they provided to different age groups was not uniformly distributed, with more care provided to adults than children. Both generalist and subspecialist respondents were more likely to feel better prepared by their residency training to care for adults than for children. Those who felt less well-prepared to care for children were less likely to do so in their practices (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.96). Fifty-four percent of the subspecialists pursued subspecialty training in internal medicine only, while 38% completed a combined internal medicine-pediatrics subspecialty program. These respondents, like the generalist respondents, also were more likely to focus clinical efforts on adults than children. Fewer than half (43%) provided any care to children zero to one year of age, while 54% provided at least some care to children aged two to 11 years. Conclusions Internal medicine-pediatrics physicians are more likely to spend a majority of their clinical care focused on adults and to perceive that they stay more current in the care of adults than of children. Potential reasons for this disparity may include training issues, greater reimbursement for the care of adults, perceptions of the impact on the medical market of the demographic shifts to older adults, and employment opportunities following training. These results also demonstrate the need for a more detailed and comprehensive assessment of the adequacy of pediatrics training in these programs.
    Academic Medicine 10/2005; 80(9):858-64. DOI:10.1097/00001888-200509000-00016 · 3.47 Impact Factor