PREPARING FOR HEALTH-CARE REFORM AND AN LCME SITE VISIT - ADDRESSING THE GENERALIST-NON-GENERALIST IMBALANCE

Citation
Mg. Haviland et al., PREPARING FOR HEALTH-CARE REFORM AND AN LCME SITE VISIT - ADDRESSING THE GENERALIST-NON-GENERALIST IMBALANCE, Academic medicine, 70(4), 1995, pp. 298-304
Citations number
9
Categorie Soggetti
Medicine Miscellaneus","Education, Scientific Disciplines
Journal title
ISSN journal
10402446
Volume
70
Issue
4
Year of publication
1995
Pages
298 - 304
Database
ISI
SICI code
1040-2446(1995)70:4<298:PFHRAA>2.0.ZU;2-6
Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate primary care outcomes for the Loma Linda University School of Medicine (LLUSM), us ing Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) data files. The tw o principal objectives were to estimate the percentages of LLUSM gradu ates who are practicing or will practice primary care medicine and to determine what information available on application to LLUSM is useful in predicting graduates' specialty choices (i.e., primary versus non- primary care). Method. In 1993-94 data were taken from several AAMC da ta files (available to all medical schools), including the Graduate Me dical Education (GME) Tracking Census and the American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS) Applicant Master File. The second and fou rth years after graduation were used as points of evaluation. Primary care (generalist) was defined as taking or having completed a residenc y in family practice, internal medicine, or pediatrics, and not having taken any fellowship training. Results. Fourth year after graduation: 42.4% of the 1,064 LLUSM graduates (1983 to 1990) were training in or had completed residencies in family practice (19.8%), internal medici ne (16.2%), or pediatrics (6.4%). Second year of GME: of the 1,365 LLU SM graduates (1983 to 1992), 49.3% were in the primary care pipeline ( 19.8% in family practice, 21.9% in internal medicine, and 7.6% in pedi atrics). Two variables available on admission to medical school were a ssociated with being in the primary care pipeline (second-year GME gen eralist): being a woman and being a member of a non-underrepresented m inority. One variable was associated with being in the nonprimary care pipeline: having a rural county code, Undergraduate grades and Medica l College Admission Test scores were not good predictors. Conclusion. The AAMC data files, available to all medical schools, are useful for estimating and evaluating primary care outcomes.