Ready or Not, Here We Come: A Qualitative Study of the Transition From Graduate Medical Education to Independent Practice.

Journal of graduate medical education Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-14 DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-24-00338.1
Gretchen Diemer, Timothy Kuchera, Jillian Zavodnick, Rosemary Frasso, Rebecca Jaffe
{"title":"Ready or Not, Here We Come: A Qualitative Study of the Transition From Graduate Medical Education to Independent Practice.","authors":"Gretchen Diemer, Timothy Kuchera, Jillian Zavodnick, Rosemary Frasso, Rebecca Jaffe","doi":"10.4300/JGME-D-24-00338.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> The transition from graduate medical education (GME) into independent practice is challenging for new attendings despite achieving \"readiness for practice,\" by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones. Most medical literature on this transition is specialty-specific and rarely involves assessment of new-to-practice attendings (NTPAs). <b>Objective</b> Lack of attending readiness results in compromised patient care. To inform GME leaders and managers, we sought to identify areas of struggle for NTPAs across specialties. With this information, we hope to spur national GME curriculum evolution, better support our NTPAs, and ultimately provide better patient care. <b>Methods</b> Qualitative freelisting was used in 2021 to explore how NTPAs, educational program leaders, and managers perceive the transition struggles. Response lists were collected electronically, then cleaned and categorized by the research team using iterative inductive combination of similar concepts. Salience index scores (Smith's S) were calculated and plotted graphically to identify inflection points for each group, above which domains were deemed salient. <b>Results</b> One hundred eighty-six participants completed surveys, yielding 518 individual responses and a response rate of 34%. Of the ACGME competencies, systems-based practice domains were most frequently salient, including \"workload\" and \"billing.\" \"Confidence,\" \"supervision,\" \"work-life balance,\" \"decision-making,\" and \"time management\" were salient struggles in all groups. Each group had domains only achieving salience for them. Professional development domains including \"confidence,\" \"imposter syndrome,\" and \"culture\" achieved salience in different groups. <b>Conclusions</b> This study identifies domains of struggle for NTPAs, which fall outside ACGME competency frameworks including workload, new environments, and professional development. Domains identified by NTPAs, program leaders, and managers were not identical.</p>","PeriodicalId":37886,"journal":{"name":"Journal of graduate medical education","volume":"17 1","pages":"71-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11838052/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of graduate medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-24-00338.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background The transition from graduate medical education (GME) into independent practice is challenging for new attendings despite achieving "readiness for practice," by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones. Most medical literature on this transition is specialty-specific and rarely involves assessment of new-to-practice attendings (NTPAs). Objective Lack of attending readiness results in compromised patient care. To inform GME leaders and managers, we sought to identify areas of struggle for NTPAs across specialties. With this information, we hope to spur national GME curriculum evolution, better support our NTPAs, and ultimately provide better patient care. Methods Qualitative freelisting was used in 2021 to explore how NTPAs, educational program leaders, and managers perceive the transition struggles. Response lists were collected electronically, then cleaned and categorized by the research team using iterative inductive combination of similar concepts. Salience index scores (Smith's S) were calculated and plotted graphically to identify inflection points for each group, above which domains were deemed salient. Results One hundred eighty-six participants completed surveys, yielding 518 individual responses and a response rate of 34%. Of the ACGME competencies, systems-based practice domains were most frequently salient, including "workload" and "billing." "Confidence," "supervision," "work-life balance," "decision-making," and "time management" were salient struggles in all groups. Each group had domains only achieving salience for them. Professional development domains including "confidence," "imposter syndrome," and "culture" achieved salience in different groups. Conclusions This study identifies domains of struggle for NTPAs, which fall outside ACGME competency frameworks including workload, new environments, and professional development. Domains identified by NTPAs, program leaders, and managers were not identical.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of graduate medical education
Journal of graduate medical education Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
248
期刊介绍: - Be the leading peer-reviewed journal in graduate medical education; - Promote scholarship and enhance the quality of research in the field; - Disseminate evidence-based approaches for teaching, assessment, and improving the learning environment; and - Generate new knowledge that enhances graduates'' ability to provide high-quality, cost-effective care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信