Revista argentina de cardiología
versión ISSN 1850-3748
PIERONI, Pablo et al. Current Status of Cardiology Residencies: 2009-2010 National Survey of ResidentsCurrent Status of Cardiology Residencies: 2009-2010 Residents National Survey. Rev. argent. cardiol. [online]. 2011, vol.79, n.2, pp. 168-178. ISSN 1850-3748.
Background The residency program currently represents the best environment for an integrated training in the specialty. Yet, the program has suffered several modifications due to multiples influences. Background The National Council of Residents in Cardiology (CONAREC, Consejo Argentino de Residentes de Cardiología) has been trying to determine the reality of the residency program situation for 20 years. Objectives To perform a complete analysis of the situation of cardiologists in training in several centers of the country, specially in the most interesting areas, as demographic variables, medical practice, academic background, cardiometabolic risk factors and psychological status. Material and Methods An anonymous and voluntary survey was carried on during the XXIX Cardiology Residencies Conference CONAREC 2009, and the information was used in a descriptive, observational and cross-sectional study. The qualitative and quantitative variables analyzed were related to demographic, academic and labor aspects, medical practice and cardiometabolic factors. The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) was used to evaluate the quality of life of residents with the individual analysis of self-fulfillment, depersonalization and emotional exhaustion. Results Mean age was 28 years, 58% were men; 81% were single and 15% had at least one child. Fifty five percent were at residency programs in the city of Buenos Aires and 77% in private centers, 86% of which had catheterization laboratory and cardiovascular surgery. Each center had an average of 8 residents, 83% had chief of residents, 55% had instructor of residents and 44% of centers had one in-hospital call physician. Residents were available inhospital call for an average of 7 days per month; 50% of residents were on the 3rd or 4th year of residency and only 4% had reduced schedules after in-hospital call. Insofar as the academic background, 77% attended clinical seminars, 82% had theory classes and 56% bibliography forums. Sixty percent had a fellowship, 56% had medical coverage, 66% had occupational risk insurance and 63% had an extra job to improve their income. Thirty three percent worked =80 hours/week and 36% slept =35 hours/week. Fifty five percent were frequently disappointed with the job and half of the survey respondents declared to feel frustrated with the job at least once a week. Thirty eight percent felt that they do not care about what happened to their patients at least once a month, and only 1 out of 3 residents believed that the job gave him/her valuable things. Conclusions During the last 20 years, the residency program has undergone significant changes concerning training and academic aspects and medical practice, and presents great heterogeneity in terms of training and labor issues nationwide. A great number of centers with residency programs do not fulfill the minimum academic background and training in medical practice requirements. In addition, current labor conditions should be evaluated in all centers with residency programs.
Palabras llave : Internship and Residency; Quality of Life; Labor Conditions.