Evaluating the Present Practice, Teaching and Evaluation of Professionalism Milestones in Southeast Michigan Internal Medicine Residency Programs

Introduction The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education revised the Internal Medicine Milestone in 2021. The professionalism requirements were expanded to include three additional sub-competencies. The aim of our study was to review the present status of professionalism education among Internal Medicine residency programs in Southeast Michigan. Methods The Southeast Michigan Center for Medical Education (SEMCME) is a community-based medical education consortium. A survey was developed to ascertain the status of Professionalism education. Four member institutions participated. Resident versus faculty responses were compared using chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests. Results A total of 85 residents and 33 faculty responded. Faculty, more than residents, reported lack of training in evaluating professionalism (Faculty 42.4% vs Resident 10.6% p < 0.001) and being uncomfortable providing feedback (Faculty 30.3% vs Resident 7.1% p = 0.002) as barriers to evaluating professionalism. Both faculty and residents felt Professionalism was the second least important competency. Both Faculty (27.2%) and Residents (20.0%) felt faculty were never or only sometimes exemplary professionalism role models (NS). A significant number of residents versus faculty reported not witnessing any professionalism breaches (9.1% vs 27.1% p = 0.05). Faculty observed more tardiness (Faculty 67.7% vs Resident 32.9% p = 0.002); incomplete records (Faculty 48.5% vs Resident 16.5% p = <0.001); and inability to accept feedback (Faculty 51.5% vs Resident 23.5% p = 0.004) than residents. Conclusion Faculty and Residents differ in their perception of Professionalism. Faculty feel additional training in evaluating and providing feedback is needed. Both Faculty and Residents report approximately one in five faculty are poor role models.