Educational and Career Outcomes of an Internal Medicine Preceptorship for First‐Year Medical Students

• Published in: Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 1999-06, Vol.14 (6), p.341-346
• Main Authors: Elnicki, D. Michael, Halbritter, Kevin A., Antonelli, Mary Ann, Linger, Barry
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Career Choice; Careers; clinical competence; Clinical Competence - standards; Clinical medicine; Curricula; curriculum; Education, Medical, Undergraduate - standards; Educational Measurement; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Internal medicine; Internal Medicine - education; Learning; Medical ethics; Medical schools; Medical sciences; Medical students; Medicine; Original; Preceptorship - standards; Prospective Studies; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Role models; Students, Medical; Teachers; Teaching. Deontology. Ethics. Legislation
• ISSN: 0884-8734; 1525-1497
• DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00352.x

OBJECTIVE: Medical educators have attempted in recent years to provide quality clinical experiences for medical students early in their medical training. We questioned whether participating in a preceptorship in internal medicine (PIM) resulted in better performances on subsequent clinical rotations and increased interest in internal medicine. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty‐four students have participated in the PIM to date, with control groups consisting of students who applied for it but were not selected (n = 36), students participating in a preceptorship in family medicine (n = 168), and the remaining students (n = 330). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University medical center and community practices. INTERVENTION: A 2‐month, clinical preceptorship following the first year of medical school. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The following outcomes were assessed: scores in the introduction to clinical medicine course; grades in the medical ethics course; scores from the internal medicine clerkship; and choosing a career in internal medicine. In their second year, PIM students scored higher in both semesters of the introduction to clinical medicine course (87% and 86% vs 84% and 84%, p’s < .01) and were more likely to receive honors in ethics (50% vs 29%, p < .01) than non‐PIM students. During the internal medicine clerkship, PIM students’ scores were significantly higher on an objective structured clinical examination (79% vs 76%, p = .05), ambulatory clinical evaluations (80% vs 76%, p < .01), and overall clerkship scores (78% vs 75%, p = .03) but not on inpatient clinical evaluations or on the National Board of Medical Examiners Subject Examination. Preceptorship students were more likely to receive honors grades in the medicine clerkship (33% vs 10%, p < .01), and they were more likely to match into internal medicine residencies than control students (54% vs 27%, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The PIM course is an intervention, early in students’ careers, which appears to benefit them academically and increase their interest in internal medicine as a career.