An appraisal of diagnostic training programs: residents' viewpoint.

Abstract

Emphasis on change in undergraduate curriculum has resulted in a general awareness of the modifications. Within the specialty of radiology, less generally recognized nontraditional concepts are being developed. The requirements established by the American Board of Radiology in 1934 have in part determined the distribution of time for resident training. The requirement, since 1957, for certification in Diagnostic Radiology or Therapeutic Radiology has further directed residency programs. The introduction of a four-year program in general radiology or an optional three-year training program in either diagnosis or therapy enabled residents to determine the viability of any of these programs by selection. The residents are in a position therefore to affect future training programs of a given institution. In 1969 the American Association of Academic Chief Residents of Radiology was created. Its first annual symposium in Berkeley, Calif., permitted an interchange of opinions and experience among advanced residents responsible for administration of training programs. Chief residents and those completing their training, from 22 training institutions in various parts of the United States, attended. Their training comprised programs for diagnostic radiology, general radiology, radiotherapy, and nuclear medicine. At this initial symposium, attention was focused on programs for diagnostic training. The deliberations resulted in what the residents considered an ideal diagnostic training program. Recognition for the need of instruction in the use of radiology technic was unanimous. Interestingly, this phase of diagnostic radiology, occasionally considered in the early phase of radiologic training as onerous, is recognized as vital by the advanced resident. The ideal period of training in the various areas of diagnostic radiology was distributed as follows: general radiology, eighteen months of the three years of training; nuclear medicine, three months (considered acceptable for adequate instruction and Board qualification); and pediatric diagnostic radiology, three months (acceptable minimum and maximum for this subspecialty). In the total period of residency, six months were recommended for neuroradiology and vascular radiology. All residents agreed that six months should be set aside as elective time. This period would permit participation, if desired, in research projects. It is reassuring that the distribution of time in this idealized plan compares favorably with that of many extant diagnostic training programs. Furthermore, the willingness of this group to place in perspective the various areas of diagnostic radiology indicates a realistic and well-balanced outlook for future leaders in the field of diagnostic radiology. Subsequent symposia will allow discussion of therapy and nuclear medicine training methods and programs.