Clinical Training as an Essential Component of Radiology Residency Training

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 541-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek Mittleider ◽  
Thomas A. Dykes ◽  
Charles K. Grimes ◽  
George Vatakencherry ◽  
Paul Harrod-Kim
1986 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 932-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
W J HOWLAND ◽  
DAVID MARLER ◽  
DONALD BOSSHART

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 643-649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah K. Schweiss ◽  
Sarah M. Westberg ◽  
Jean Y. Moon ◽  
Todd D. Sorensen

Introduction: As the health-care system evolves and shifts to value-based payment systems, there is a recognized need to increase the number of ambulatory care trained pharmacists. Objective: The objective of this article is to describe the administrative structure of the University of Minnesota Postgraduate Year 1 (PGY1) Pharmacy Residency program and to encourage adoption of similar models nationally in order to expand ambulatory care residency training opportunities and meet the demand for pharmacist practitioners. Program Structure: The University of Minnesota PGY1 Pharmacy Residency program is a multisite program centered on the practice of pharmaceutical care and provision of comprehensive medication management (CMM) services in ambulatory care settings. The centralized administration of a multisite academic-affiliated training model creates efficiency in the administration process, while allowing sites to focus on clinical training. This model also offers many innovative and unique opportunities to residents. Conclusion: A multisite university-affiliated ambulatory care residency training model provides efficiency in program administration, while successfully accelerating the growth of quality ambulatory care residency training and supporting innovative delivery of shared core learning experiences. Consequently, practice sites grow in their service delivery capacity and quality of care.


2006 ◽  
Vol 149 (6) ◽  
pp. 735-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepak Kamat ◽  
Robert W. Armstrong

2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Fischetti ◽  
Jon T. Shiroma ◽  
Brian A. Poteet

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 77-86
Author(s):  
Yew Kong Lee ◽  
Chirk Jenn Ng ◽  
Joong Hiong Sim ◽  
Firdaus Amira ◽  
Chan Choong Foong ◽  
...  

Introduction: A compulsory research component is becoming increasingly common for clinical residents. However, integrating research into a busy clinical training schedule can be challenging. This study aimed to explore barriers to research supervision in specialist training programmes from the perspectives of clinical supervisors and trainees at a Malaysian university hospital. Methods: Qualitative interviews and focus group discussions were conducted (December 2016 to July 2017) with clinical supervisors (n=11) and clinical trainees (n=26) utilising a topic guide exploring institutional guidelines, research culture and supervisor-student roles. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically to identify barriers to research supervision. Results: Supervisors and trainees from 11 out of 18 departments participated. Both clinical supervisors and trainees struggled to successfully integrate a compulsory research component into residency training. Among the reasons identified included a lack of supervisory access due to the nature of clinical rotations and placements, clashing training priorities (clinical vs research) that discouraged trainees and supervisors from engaging in research, poor research expertise and experience among clinical supervisors hampering high-quality supervision, and a frustrating lack of clear standards between the various parties involved in research guidance and examination. Conclusion: Both clinical supervisors and trainees struggled to successfully integrate a compulsory research component into residency training. This was not only an issue of resource limitation since questions regarding clinical priorities and unclear research standards emerged. Thus, institutional coordinators need to set clear standards and provide adequate training to make research meaningful and achievable for busy clinical supervisors and trainees.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4s) ◽  
pp. 125-133
Author(s):  
Brian S. Heist ◽  
Haruka Matsubara Torok

ABSTRACT Background International medical graduates (IMGs) have significant exposure to clinical training in their home country, which provides opportunity for international comparison of training experiences. One relevant IMG population is Japanese physicians who have completed some training before entering residency programs in the United States and desire to improve medical education in Japan. Objective We examined Japanese IMGs' perceptions of the respective attributes of residency in the United States and Japan. Methods Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 33 purposively sampled Japanese IMGs who had completed training. We used exploratory thematic analysis, iterative data collection, and thematic analyses with constant comparison. Results Comments were organized into 3 categories: (1) attributes of US residency preferable to Japanese residency; (2) attributes of residency training with no clear preference for the US or Japanese systems; and (3) attributes of Japanese residency preferable to US residency. Within each category, we matched themes to residency program requirements or culture of medical training. Main themes include high regard for Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Common Program Requirements, with emphasis on efficient achievement of clinical competency through graded responsibility, contrasted with preference expressed for a Japanese training culture of increased professional commitment facilitated by a lack of work hour limits and development of broad clinician skills, including bedside procedures and radiology interpretation. Conclusions Japanese training culture contrasts with a US model that is increasingly focused on work-life balance and associated compartmentalization of patient care. These findings enhance our understanding of the global medical education landscape and challenges to international standardization of training.


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 154-156
Author(s):  
Jason C. Hoffmann ◽  
Jonathan Minkin ◽  
Vanessa Karimi ◽  
Shantanu Warhadpande ◽  
Minhaj S. Khaja ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document