What are we doing? A survey of United States nephrology fellowship program directors

Abstract

Interest in nephrology has been declining in recent years. Long work hours and a poor work/life balance may be partially responsible, and may also affect a fellowship’s educational mission. We surveyed nephrology program directors using a web-based survey in order to define current clinical and educational practice patterns and identify areas for improvement. Our survey explored fellowship program demographics, fellows’ workload, call structure, and education. Program directors were asked to estimate the average and maximum number of patients on each of their inpatient services, the number of patients seen by fellows in clinic, and to provide details regarding their overnight and weekend call. In addition, we asked about number of and composition of didactic conferences. Sixty-eight out of 148 program directors responded to the survey (46%). The average number of fellows per program was approximately seven. Thebusiest inpatient services hadameanof 21.5±5.9patientsonaverage and33.8±10.7at their maximum. The second busiest services had an average and maximum of 15.6±6.0 and 24.5±10.8 patients, respectively. Transplant-only services had fewer patients than other service compositions. A minority of services (14.5%) employed physician extenders. Fellowsmost commonly see patients duringa single weekly continuity clinic, withatypical fellow-to-faculty ratio of 2:1. The majority of programs do not alter outpatient responsibilities during inpatient service time. Most programs (approximately 75%) divided overnight and weekend call responsibilities equally between first year and more senior fellows. Educational practices varied widely between programs. Our survey underscores the large variety in workload, practice patterns, and didactics at different institutions and provides a framework to help improve the service/education balance in nephrology fellowships.