Return on Investment of Three-Year Accelerated Programs for Students, Medical Schools, Departments, and Community

Abstract

Building on the initial accelerated pathway programs in the 1970s to increase workforce, nearly 30 schools have launched accelerated 3-year pathways (A3YP) during the past decade. The authors based on their educational roles, experiences, and scholarship with A3YP provide this perspective of the argument for A3YP and potential disadvantages for each group—students, schools, residencies, departments, and community. When schools consider innovations, they might consider A3YPs for multiple reasons; this perspective helps provide justification for the program and broadly considers return on investment (ROI). The ROI for students includes decreased debt, reduced costs and stress associated with the fourth-year residency applications, and a directed pathway with facilitated transition into a residency program with accompanying professional identity development. Disadvantages for students include early specialty commitment, risk of deceleration, and condensed curriculum. The ROI for schools includes recruiting and retaining students, who will then transition more easily into residency and stimulating innovation. Residency programs gain residents with known skills, who have been a part of the department for 3 years. In addition, fewer residency slots for interviewing leads to saving recruitment administrative costs and time. Finally, many programs are intended to increase the workforce, since students who come to the region for medical school and transition directly into residency are likely to stay in the region. Disadvantages include increased curricular complexity for the medical school, increased administrative support, and advising resources. Finally, several of the accelerated programs attract matriculants from diverse backgrounds contributing to the diversity of the medical school, residency program, and community workforce.