PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1586124

Training internists in procedural skills.

Abstract

The procedural skills of internists have been scrutinized recently because of concern for quality of care and because of economic and liability issues. The findings of recent surveys of program directors and practicing internists about procedural skills are reviewed. The results of these surveys in relation to the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) new training requirements and New York State's new policy requiring credentialing of residents in training are also discussed. Surveys show that internists do a large number and variety of procedures, that the number of procedures varies with the nature and location of practice, and that internists who more recently completed training do more procedures. Many graduates do not master the procedures their program directors think they should, and many learn procedures, often without supervision, after they have entered practice. The ABIM has recently ruled that residents must have documented experience and competence in specific core procedures to become eligible for certification. Also, New York State, in the wake of the Libby Zion case, now requires that all residents be credentialed in the procedures they do during training. Programs in internal medicine need to decide which procedures their residents will master and assure that their residents receive the training and testing necessary for competency and for formal certification of mastery in each procedure. Programs may restructure rotations to assure adequate experience. In the new era of accountability, certification of training and of competence in procedural skills will be an important function of training programs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R S Wigton. 1992-06-15. Training internists in procedural skills.. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-116-12-1091

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to determine whether the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO OGS) can be assessed accurately from digital dental casts and whether there are statistical differences between digital and plaster dental casts in scoring the ABO OGS. METHODS: Thirty posttreatment plaster dental casts were selected and scanned by OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ) to produce 30 corresponding digital dental casts. The plaster and digital casts were compared by using the criteria of the ABO OGS. Because the data were ordinal, a nonparametic statistical analysis was used. RESULTS: The Wilcoxon test for paired samples showed significant differences between the plaster and digital casts for occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, and total scores (P <.05). No significant differences were found for alignment, marginal ridges, overjet, and interproximal contacts. Buccolingual inclination was not included in this study because of inability to perform proper measurements with the OrthoCAD program. Mean differences of points deducted ranged from .03 point for marginal ridges to 5.07 points for the total score. The variable with the most points deducted related to occlusal relationships, and the fewest points were deducted for interproximal contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the current OrthoCAD program (version 2.2) was not adequate for scoring all parameters as required by the ABO OGS.

Certification↗