The Experts below are selected from a list of 231552 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Kenar D Jhaveri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Opportunities for Subspecialization in Nephrology.
Advances in chronic kidney disease, 2020Co-Authors: Mala Sachdeva, Ankur D. Shah, Harpreet K. Singh, Deepa Malieckal, Janani Rangaswami, Kenar D JhaveriAbstract:The interface between Nephrology and other fields of medicine continues to expand. With the advent of novel therapies in cancer, diagnostics and therapeutics in lithology, novel devices in cardiology, advances in women's health issues, novel diagnostics and therapies in glomerular diseases, and the national priority in home-based dialysis, several subspecialties in Nephrology have emerged. This article will discuss the subspecialties of oncoNephrology, cardioNephrology, obstetric Nephrology, uroNephrology, glomerular disease specialization, and home-based dialysis in Nephrology. We discuss the current state of each subspecialty, recommended educational content, length of training, available training opportunities, and potential career pathways for each.
-
Enhancing outpatient Nephrology experience for internal medicine residents.
Clinical kidney journal, 2017Co-Authors: Varun Agrawal, Kenar D Jhaveri, Hitesh H ShahAbstract:Interest in Nephrology careers continues to remain low in the USA. Educational innovations that enhance interest in Nephrology among medical trainees are being actively studied. While internal medicine (IM) residency programs commonly offer the inpatient Nephrology elective to the resident, outpatient Nephrology experience is lacking. Understanding the provision of care in outpatient and home dialysis and management of patients with glomerular diseases, chronic kidney disease and kidney transplantation are vital components of an outpatient Nephrology rotation. In this review article, we share our experiences in incorporating outpatient Nephrology to the IM resident's elective time. We also present the structure of the Nephrology rotations at our programs and suggest several learning opportunities in outpatient Nephrology that the training community can provide to medical residents. Strategies to effectively set up an outpatient Nephrology rotation are also described. While more educational research on the impact of outpatient Nephrology on resident learning and career choices are needed, we encourage a collaborative effort between faculty members in Nephrology and the medicine residency programs to provide this unique learning opportunity to IM residents.
-
Nephrology education for medical students: a narrative review.
Renal failure, 2016Co-Authors: Sarah D. Bayefsky, Hitesh H Shah, Kenar D JhaveriAbstract:AbstractBackground: Strategies used to teach Nephrology to medical students are not well studied. This study assesses the published literature on medical student education in Nephrology.Methods: A review of the published literature on Nephrology education for medical students was conducted on two major online search engines (PubMed and ERIC). In addition, references of the manuscripts discovered in these searches were reviewed. The empirical studies were categorized by subject within Nephrology and research design.Results: We found 26 original studies in which a method of teaching Nephrology to medical students was described. The studies dated from 1977 to 2015. The focus of these Nephrology teaching experiences was as follows: anatomy (6.5%), physiology (22.6%), pathophysiology (29.0%), pathology (6.5%), treatment (25.8%), and general Nephrology (9.7%). The studies were also categorized into various types of research design. 6.9% had either no assessment of the educational experience or had a description...
-
Nephrology elective experience during medical residency: a national survey of US Nephrology fellowship training program directors
Renal failure, 2015Co-Authors: Hitesh H Shah, Joseph Mattana, Nancy D. Adams, Aditya Kadiyala, Kenar D JhaveriAbstract:AbstractInterest in Nephrology careers continues to decline in the United States. The reasons for this declining interest are not fully understood but it is plausible that inadequate exposure to the full spectrum of what a career in Nephrology encompasses may be part of the explanation. Inpatient-based Nephrology electives have been a common venue for residents to gain exposure to Nephrology but little is known regarding the details of such electives and how often they include outpatient experiences. We carried out a national survey of Nephrology fellowship training program directors to obtain data on the content of Nephrology elective experiences as well as their ideas on how to promote interest in the field. The survey revealed the majority of elective experiences to be either exclusively or heavily inpatient based, with only a small percentage having a substantial outpatient component, particularly in outpatient dialysis or transplantation. Training program directors felt that providing greater outpati...
-
wanted pediatric nephrologists why trainees are not choosing pediatric Nephrology
Renal Failure, 2014Co-Authors: Maria E Ferris, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Zion Ko, Ahinee Amamoo, John D. Mahan, Keisha Gibson, Kenar D Jhaveri, Tejas Desai, William A PrimackAbstract:AbstractA workforce crisis for many pediatric specialties, particularly Nephrology, is due to growing retirement rates, attrition during training, and retention difficulties. To obtain specific information regarding pediatric Nephrology trainee shortages, we administered two cross-sectional surveys to non-renal pediatric subspecialty fellows and pediatric Nephrology program directors. We characterized the fellows' experiences with Nephrology and the program directors' experiences with their fellows as well as their outcomes in the last 10 years. We analyzed responses from 531 non-renal fellows (14.4% response rate). Overall, 317 (60%) fellows rated Nephrology as difficult, particularly women (65.4% vs. 49.5%, p < 0.001), with American women medical graduates rating Nephrology as more difficult compared to all others (p = 0.001). More men than women (24% vs. 8%, p < 0.001) considered the monetary benefit as not adequate. Program directors (25; 64% response rate) represented 57% of all USA fellows in traini...
Mark G Parker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Increasing Medical Student Interest in Nephrology.
American journal of nephrology, 2019Co-Authors: Stephen M. Sozio, Hitesh H Shah, Kurtis A. Pivert, Harini A. Chakkera, Abdo Asmar, Manu R. Varma, Benjamin D. Morrow, Ankit B. Patel, Katlyn Leight, Mark G ParkerAbstract:Background: Interest in Nephrology careers is declining, possibly due to perceptions of the field and/or training aspects. Understanding practices of medical schools successfully instilling Nephrology interest could inform efforts to attract leading candidates to the specialty. Methods: The American Society of Nephrology Workforce Committee’s Best Practices Project was one of several initiatives to increase Nephrology career interest. Board-certified nephrologists graduating medical school between 2002 and 2009 were identified in the American Medical Association Masterfile and their medical schools ranked by production. Renal educators from the top 10 producing institutions participated in directed focus groups inquiring about key factors in creating Nephrology career interest, including aspects of their renal courses, clinical rotations, research activities, and faculty interactions. Thematic content analysis of the transcripts (with inductive reasoning implementing grounded theory) was performed to identify factors contributing to their programs’ success. Results: The 10 schools identified were geographically representative, with similar proportions of graduates choosing internal medicine (mean 26%) as the national graduating class (26% in the 2017 residency Match). Eighteen educators from 9 of these 10 institutions participated. Four major themes were identified contributing to these schools’ success: (1) Nephrology faculty interaction with medical students; (2) clinical exposure to Nephrology and clinical relevance of renal pathophysiology materials; (3) use of novel educational modalities; and (4) exposure, in particular early exposure, to the breadth of Nephrology practice. Conclusion: Early and consistent exposure to a range of clinical Nephrology experiences and Nephrology faculty contact with medical students are important to help generate interest in the specialty.
-
education in Nephrology fellowship a survey based needs assessment
Journal of The American Society of Nephrology, 2017Co-Authors: Robert Rope, Mark G Parker, Stephen M. Sozio, Kurtis A. Pivert, Sylvia Bereknyei MerellAbstract:Educational needs assessments for Nephrology fellowship training are limited. This study assessed fellows' perceptions of current educational needs and interest in novel modalities that may improve their educational experience and quantified educational resources used by programs and fellows. We distributed a seven-question electronic survey to all United States-based fellows receiving complimentary American Society of Nephrology (ASN) membership at the end of the 2015-2016 academic year in conjunction with the ASN Nephrology Fellows Survey. One third (320 of 863; 37%) of fellows in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited positions responded. Most respondents rated overall quality of teaching in fellowship as either "good" (37%) or "excellent" (44%), and most (55%) second-year fellows felt "fully prepared" for independent practice. Common educational resources used by fellows included UpToDate, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology/Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, and Nephrology Self-Assessment Program; others-including ASN's online curricula-were used less often. Fellows indicated interest in additional instruction in several core topics, including home dialysis modalities, ultrasonography, and pathology. Respondents strongly supported interventions to improve pathology instruction and increase time for physiology and clinical review. In conclusion, current Nephrology fellows perceive several gaps in training. Innovation in education and training is needed to better prepare future nephrologists for the growing challenges of kidney care.
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background: There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods: A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results: 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if thefield had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions: Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community. Am J Kidney Dis. 61(4):540-546. © 2013 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if the field had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community.
-
The Future Nephrology Workforce: Will There Be One?
Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2011Co-Authors: Mark G Parker, Mitchell H. Rosner, Tod Ibrahim, Rachel N. Shaffer, Bruce A. MolitorisAbstract:Interest in Nephrology as a career is declining and has been on the decline for nearly one decade. From 2002 to 2009, all internal medicine subspecialties except geriatric medicine increased the number of available fellowship positions. However, only two subspecialties attracted fewer United States medical graduates (USMGs) in 2009 than in 2002: geriatric medicine and Nephrology. This drop occurred at a time when demand for nephrologists is increasing and when the specialty is having a harder time benefiting from the substantial contribution of international medical graduates (IMGs). Today's USMGs possess fundamentally different career and personal goals from their teachers and mentors. Medical students report receiving minimal exposure to Nephrology in clinical rotations, and they perceive that the specialty is too complex, uninteresting, and lacks professional opportunity. Meanwhile, the demographics of kidney disease in the United States, as well as recent national health policy developments, indicate a growing need for nephrologists. Efforts to improve the educational continuum in Nephrology and enhance mentorship are essential to restoring interest in Nephrology for USMGs, maintaining its appeal among IMGs, and developing a workforce sufficient to meet future demand for renal care.
Hitesh H Shah - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Increasing Medical Student Interest in Nephrology.
American journal of nephrology, 2019Co-Authors: Stephen M. Sozio, Hitesh H Shah, Kurtis A. Pivert, Harini A. Chakkera, Abdo Asmar, Manu R. Varma, Benjamin D. Morrow, Ankit B. Patel, Katlyn Leight, Mark G ParkerAbstract:Background: Interest in Nephrology careers is declining, possibly due to perceptions of the field and/or training aspects. Understanding practices of medical schools successfully instilling Nephrology interest could inform efforts to attract leading candidates to the specialty. Methods: The American Society of Nephrology Workforce Committee’s Best Practices Project was one of several initiatives to increase Nephrology career interest. Board-certified nephrologists graduating medical school between 2002 and 2009 were identified in the American Medical Association Masterfile and their medical schools ranked by production. Renal educators from the top 10 producing institutions participated in directed focus groups inquiring about key factors in creating Nephrology career interest, including aspects of their renal courses, clinical rotations, research activities, and faculty interactions. Thematic content analysis of the transcripts (with inductive reasoning implementing grounded theory) was performed to identify factors contributing to their programs’ success. Results: The 10 schools identified were geographically representative, with similar proportions of graduates choosing internal medicine (mean 26%) as the national graduating class (26% in the 2017 residency Match). Eighteen educators from 9 of these 10 institutions participated. Four major themes were identified contributing to these schools’ success: (1) Nephrology faculty interaction with medical students; (2) clinical exposure to Nephrology and clinical relevance of renal pathophysiology materials; (3) use of novel educational modalities; and (4) exposure, in particular early exposure, to the breadth of Nephrology practice. Conclusion: Early and consistent exposure to a range of clinical Nephrology experiences and Nephrology faculty contact with medical students are important to help generate interest in the specialty.
-
Enhancing outpatient Nephrology experience for internal medicine residents.
Clinical kidney journal, 2017Co-Authors: Varun Agrawal, Kenar D Jhaveri, Hitesh H ShahAbstract:Interest in Nephrology careers continues to remain low in the USA. Educational innovations that enhance interest in Nephrology among medical trainees are being actively studied. While internal medicine (IM) residency programs commonly offer the inpatient Nephrology elective to the resident, outpatient Nephrology experience is lacking. Understanding the provision of care in outpatient and home dialysis and management of patients with glomerular diseases, chronic kidney disease and kidney transplantation are vital components of an outpatient Nephrology rotation. In this review article, we share our experiences in incorporating outpatient Nephrology to the IM resident's elective time. We also present the structure of the Nephrology rotations at our programs and suggest several learning opportunities in outpatient Nephrology that the training community can provide to medical residents. Strategies to effectively set up an outpatient Nephrology rotation are also described. While more educational research on the impact of outpatient Nephrology on resident learning and career choices are needed, we encourage a collaborative effort between faculty members in Nephrology and the medicine residency programs to provide this unique learning opportunity to IM residents.
-
Nephrology education for medical students: a narrative review.
Renal failure, 2016Co-Authors: Sarah D. Bayefsky, Hitesh H Shah, Kenar D JhaveriAbstract:AbstractBackground: Strategies used to teach Nephrology to medical students are not well studied. This study assesses the published literature on medical student education in Nephrology.Methods: A review of the published literature on Nephrology education for medical students was conducted on two major online search engines (PubMed and ERIC). In addition, references of the manuscripts discovered in these searches were reviewed. The empirical studies were categorized by subject within Nephrology and research design.Results: We found 26 original studies in which a method of teaching Nephrology to medical students was described. The studies dated from 1977 to 2015. The focus of these Nephrology teaching experiences was as follows: anatomy (6.5%), physiology (22.6%), pathophysiology (29.0%), pathology (6.5%), treatment (25.8%), and general Nephrology (9.7%). The studies were also categorized into various types of research design. 6.9% had either no assessment of the educational experience or had a description...
-
Nephrology elective experience during medical residency: a national survey of US Nephrology fellowship training program directors
Renal failure, 2015Co-Authors: Hitesh H Shah, Joseph Mattana, Nancy D. Adams, Aditya Kadiyala, Kenar D JhaveriAbstract:AbstractInterest in Nephrology careers continues to decline in the United States. The reasons for this declining interest are not fully understood but it is plausible that inadequate exposure to the full spectrum of what a career in Nephrology encompasses may be part of the explanation. Inpatient-based Nephrology electives have been a common venue for residents to gain exposure to Nephrology but little is known regarding the details of such electives and how often they include outpatient experiences. We carried out a national survey of Nephrology fellowship training program directors to obtain data on the content of Nephrology elective experiences as well as their ideas on how to promote interest in the field. The survey revealed the majority of elective experiences to be either exclusively or heavily inpatient based, with only a small percentage having a substantial outpatient component, particularly in outpatient dialysis or transplantation. Training program directors felt that providing greater outpati...
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background: There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods: A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results: 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if thefield had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions: Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community. Am J Kidney Dis. 61(4):540-546. © 2013 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
Donald E. Kohan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background: There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods: A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results: 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if thefield had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions: Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community. Am J Kidney Dis. 61(4):540-546. © 2013 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if the field had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community.
-
The Changing Phenotype of Academic Nephrology— A Future at Risk?
Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2009Co-Authors: Donald E. Kohan, Bradley C. BairdAbstract:Background and objectives: Academic Nephrology faces increasing challenges in faculty hiring and development. However, it is unknown how these pressures have affected the number and demographics of academic nephrologists. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: Using the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster database, changes were analyzed in MD Nephrology, as well as other internal medicine subspecialty, faculty from 1998 to 2008. Results: There were 1315 full-time MD Nephrology faculty in 2008; this fell by 4.9% over the past decade. There were fewer junior, and more senior, faculty over this period. This was associated with 12.4% fewer tenured, 22.3% fewer tenure track, and an 11.5% increase in nontenure track, academic nephrologists. Academic nephrologists who are U.S. medical school graduates declined by 11.9%, while those who were international medical school graduates increased by 13.2%; Nephrology has a greater percentage of international medical school graduates than any other internal medicine subspecialty. Female Nephrology faculty increased by 14.3%, while male faculty fell by 9.5%. Asian Nephrology faculty increased by 41.3%, while Caucasians declined by 15.2%. Similar changes in all the above parameters were seen for most other internal medicine subspecialties. The Nephrology research programs at the top 20 research institutions, as compared with all other Nephrology programs, had a greater decline in total MD, male, tenure track, and junior faculty. Conclusions: These data suggest that the future of academic Nephrology is at risk. The decline in Nephrology faculty provides incentive for leaders in academic Nephrology to improve recruiting and retention practices.
Maria E Ferris - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
wanted pediatric nephrologists why trainees are not choosing pediatric Nephrology
Renal Failure, 2014Co-Authors: Maria E Ferris, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Zion Ko, Ahinee Amamoo, John D. Mahan, Keisha Gibson, Kenar D Jhaveri, Tejas Desai, William A PrimackAbstract:AbstractA workforce crisis for many pediatric specialties, particularly Nephrology, is due to growing retirement rates, attrition during training, and retention difficulties. To obtain specific information regarding pediatric Nephrology trainee shortages, we administered two cross-sectional surveys to non-renal pediatric subspecialty fellows and pediatric Nephrology program directors. We characterized the fellows' experiences with Nephrology and the program directors' experiences with their fellows as well as their outcomes in the last 10 years. We analyzed responses from 531 non-renal fellows (14.4% response rate). Overall, 317 (60%) fellows rated Nephrology as difficult, particularly women (65.4% vs. 49.5%, p < 0.001), with American women medical graduates rating Nephrology as more difficult compared to all others (p = 0.001). More men than women (24% vs. 8%, p < 0.001) considered the monetary benefit as not adequate. Program directors (25; 64% response rate) represented 57% of all USA fellows in traini...
-
Wanted: pediatric nephrologists! — why trainees are not choosing pediatric Nephrology
Renal Failure, 2014Co-Authors: Maria E Ferris, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Zion Ko, Ahinee Amamoo, John D. Mahan, Keisha Gibson, Kenar D Jhaveri, Tejas Desai, William A PrimackAbstract:AbstractA workforce crisis for many pediatric specialties, particularly Nephrology, is due to growing retirement rates, attrition during training, and retention difficulties. To obtain specific information regarding pediatric Nephrology trainee shortages, we administered two cross-sectional surveys to non-renal pediatric subspecialty fellows and pediatric Nephrology program directors. We characterized the fellows' experiences with Nephrology and the program directors' experiences with their fellows as well as their outcomes in the last 10 years. We analyzed responses from 531 non-renal fellows (14.4% response rate). Overall, 317 (60%) fellows rated Nephrology as difficult, particularly women (65.4% vs. 49.5%, p
-
Wanted: pediatric nephrologists! - why trainees are not choosing pediatric Nephrology.
Renal failure, 2014Co-Authors: Maria E Ferris, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Ahinee Amamoo, John D. Mahan, Kenar D Jhaveri, Tejas Desai, Keisha L. Gibson, William A PrimackAbstract:AbstractA workforce crisis for many pediatric specialties, particularly Nephrology, is due to growing retirement rates, attrition during training, and retention difficulties. To obtain specific information regarding pediatric Nephrology trainee shortages, we administered two cross-sectional surveys to non-renal pediatric subspecialty fellows and pediatric Nephrology program directors. We characterized the fellows' experiences with Nephrology and the program directors' experiences with their fellows as well as their outcomes in the last 10 years. We analyzed responses from 531 non-renal fellows (14.4% response rate). Overall, 317 (60%) fellows rated Nephrology as difficult, particularly women (65.4% vs. 49.5%, p
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background: There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods: A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results: 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if thefield had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions: Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community. Am J Kidney Dis. 61(4):540-546. © 2013 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
-
why not Nephrology a survey of us internal medicine subspecialty fellows
American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2013Co-Authors: Kenar D Jhaveri, Matthew A Sparks, Hitesh H Shah, Seyyar Khan, Mark G Parker, Edward G.a. Iglesia, Arun Chawla, Maria E Ferris, Tejas Desai, Donald E. KohanAbstract:Background There is a decreased interest in Nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than Nephrology to determine why they did not choose Nephrology. Methods A web-based survey with multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions was sent in summer 2011 to trainees reached through internal medicine subspecialty program directors. Results 714 fellows responded to the survey (11% response rate). All non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialties were represented, and 90% of respondents were from university-based programs. Of the respondents, 31% indicated that Nephrology was the most difficult physiology course taught in medical school, and 26% had considered Nephrology as a career choice. Nearly one-fourth of the respondents said they would have considered Nephrology if the field had higher income or the subject were taught well during medical school and residency training. The top reasons for not choosing Nephrology were the belief that patients with end-stage renal disease were too complicated, the lack of a mentor, and that there were insufficient procedures in Nephrology. Conclusions Most non-Nephrology internal medicine subspecialty fellows never considered Nephrology as a career choice. A significant proportion were dissuaded by factors such as the challenges of the patient population, lack of role models, lack of procedures, and perceived difficulty of the subject matter. Addressing these factors will require the concerted effort of nephrologists throughout the training community.