Pd60-05 Assessing the Efficacy of a Novel Longitudinal Resident Clinic: Proof of Concept

You have accessJournal of UrologyEducation Research III (PD60)1 May 2024PD60-05 ASSESSING THE EFFICACY OF A NOVEL LONGITUDINAL RESIDENT CLINIC: PROOF OF CONCEPT Samuel J. Ivan, Mackenzie L. Needham, Nicholas B. Koch, S. Lee Guice, Manish N. Patel, Ornob P. Roy, Alison C. Keenan, Peter E. Clark, and Stephen B. Riggs Samuel J. IvanSamuel J. Ivan , Mackenzie L. NeedhamMackenzie L. Needham , Nicholas B. KochNicholas B. Koch , S. Lee GuiceS. Lee Guice , Manish N. PatelManish N. Patel , Ornob P. RoyOrnob P. Roy , Alison C. KeenanAlison C. Keenan , Peter E. ClarkPeter E. Clark , and Stephen B. RiggsStephen B. Riggs View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009460.27205.df.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Our institution developed a novel longitudinal resident clinic (LRC) in 2021 in which residents, with faculty supervision, assume primary management of patients over a continuous four-year period. The LRC design mimics general urology practice by establishing longitudinal follow-up with a general urology patient cohort and aims to increase resident confidence in ambulatory urologic practice. We audited the LRC to assess continuity of care and distribution of consult diagnoses and surgical cases. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of LRC patients between 9/29/2022 and 6/29/2023 for office consults and 10/26/22 to 10/30/23 for surgical cases. During this time five residents (Post Grad Years 2-5) saw patients in bi-weekly half-day clinics. We report longitudinal care, defined as an additional in-person follow-up visit with the consulting resident, as well as surgical continuity of care defined by resident participation in a surgical case posted through the LRC. We also report consult diagnosis and surgical case distribution and frequency. RESULTS: Outpatient consultations in the LRC totaled 124 for the period of interest. Of these patients, 67.7% completed a follow-up visit. Reasons for no follow-up included visit not scheduled, cancelled, or follow-up not indicated. Of patients who completed follow-up, 78.6% had that visit with the same consulting resident, which we considered successful longitudinal follow-up. During the study period, 42 surgical cases were posted through the LRC. Of these, 47.6% included participation by the posting resident while 76% included any resident. There were 27 unique consult diagnoses after grouping similar diagnoses and 10 different surgical cases. The most common diagnoses and cases are listed in Table 1. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal care was achieved with 78.6% of patients returning for follow-up with the same resident. Surgical continuity, however, was limited to 47.6% of cases. The LRC clinic demonstrated a range of presenting complaints and surgical cases, but their diversity should be improved to further model general practice. Referral patterns to subspecialty physicians in a tertiary care practice may explain these patterns. These findings demonstrate alignment with LRC stated aims and highlight areas for improvement. Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e1274 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Samuel J. Ivan More articles by this author Mackenzie L. Needham More articles by this author Nicholas B. Koch More articles by this author S. Lee Guice More articles by this author Manish N. Patel More articles by this author Ornob P. Roy More articles by this author Alison C. Keenan More articles by this author Peter E. Clark More articles by this author Stephen B. Riggs More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...