Family Medicine Residency Training
Program's Match Improves After Adding Optional Fourth Year
By Leslie Champlin
9/20/2006
The University of Arizona Family Medicine Residency launched its first four-year option in 2001-2002. A year later, the program filled all its positions with U.S. graduates, according to Lebensohn. This year, the program filled six of eight positions -- due in part to lack of student knowledge about the addition of two extra positions late in the match process, said Lebensohn.
The additional training isn't designed to allow residents to subspecialize, she noted. Rather, it provides additional fellowship training in an area of interest and allows additional time to sharpen residents' expertise in those areas.
"The resident, for example, gets more training in procedures that they'll need in a rural practice," she said. "They are working more independently, but they still can ask questions and take time to do the rotations" needed for additional expertise.
The effort has paid off, according to Lebensohn. "We saw an increase in both the number and the quality of U.S. graduates to interview," she said. "I think having a fourth year helped. They solidify what they learned during the first three years" with focused training.
The University of Arizona experience echoes that of other programs that offer four-year family medicine training options. Most, like Arizona's, consist of fellowship opportunities in areas ranging from sports medicine to integrative medicine to obstetrics to geriatrics. Others offer combined training, such as the four-year dual family medicine-internal medicine program at Eastern Virginia Medical School in Norfolk.
But interest in four years of family medicine training seems to be growing. The University of Arizona experience supports earlier research by Ariel Smits, M.D., M.P.H., clinical instructor of family medicine at the Oregon Health and Science University, and her colleagues. In March, they suggested that extending family medicine residency to four years would have a neutral or positive effect on student interest in the specialty.
Writing in "Residency Applicants' Perspectives on Family Medicine Residency Training Length" (PDF file: 5 pages / 143 KB. More about PDFs.) in the March Family Medicine, Smits reported that 77.2 percent of respondents to a 2004-2005 survey said "increasing training to four years would either make them more likely to choose family medicine or would not affect their decision."
Still, much of that increased interest in a four-year family medicine residency rests on the availability of focused training, according to Perry Pugno, M.D., director of medical education at the AAFP.
"Students and residents are favorably disposed toward four-year family medicine residency training programs with the caveat that the fourth year offers a value-added experience," said Pugno. "They aren't interested in four years of the same thing."
Smits agreed. "If family medicine training were extended to four years, applicants appeared to be most interested in additional training that was specific to their unique interests or needs," she and her coauthors wrote. "The majority (77.8 percent) of respondents indicated interest in a four-year program with specific additional training rather than generically increased training time."
Although an optional fourth year appears to be gaining in approval ratings, a mandatory four-year program remains troublesome for many in family medicine education. Beyond potential student reactions to a four-year residency, financial barriers top the list of concerns. Residencies' host institutions may be reluctant to fund four-year positions, and graduate medical education, or GME, funding through Medicare supports residency training only for the period of time required for board certification. That means GME funds for a four-year family medicine residency won't be available unless the American Board of Family Medicine changes its certification requirements from three to four years of training.
Moreover, post-training service commitments begin at the end of the board-required training, and many residents with National Health Service Corps or other contracts could not complete a fourth year.
"I'm not convinced -- with the system requirements now -- that we are ready for a mandatory four-year program," said Lebensohn. "But we can definitely see the benefits of offering an optional fourth year. In general, our graduates have been extremely happy."
Residency Directors Air Duty-hour Concerns in AFMRD Survey
Advocacy Training Can Give Students, Residents Key Skills
Study: Med Students' Use of 'Web 2.0' Can Become Unprofessional
AAFP Supports Most Proposed Changes to LCME Accreditation Standard
Four New Medical Schools Seek to Bolster Primary Care
CHC-Residency Pairings Benefit Residents, Patients
Baylor Family Medicine Residency to Close in 2011
Med Students Dissatisfied With Training in Health Systems, Medical Economics
Medical School Enrollment Grows in 2009
Medical Students' Empathy Plunges in Third Year, Says Study
ACGME Launches First Peer-Reviewed Journal Dedicated to GME
STFM Develops First National Family Medicine Clerkship Curriculum
LCME Invites Comments on Proposed Changes to Accreditation Standards
AAMC Offers New Resources on Debt Management
Resident Fatigue, Distress Can Lead to Medical Errors, Says Study
Survey Shows Medical Students Consider EHRs Key Practice Tools
Report Details Features of U.S. Seniors Entering Family Medicine
FMIGs Invited to Sign Up for Advocacy Webinar
Report Details Factors That Contribute to Students' Specialty Choice
New AAFP Resource Aims to Educate Medical Students About PCMH








