7 ms·

NYU and Other Medical Schools Offer Shorter Course in Training, for Less Tuition

26 points by interconnector 14y ago

michaelhoffman 14y ago
This is a fantastic idea. It's interesting that they are starting by making it available to people going into primary care, though, for which the final two years will be most useful. My specialist physician friends say that they basically restarted their training in residency. In particular, I have pathologist friends who say they almost never use knowledge from their clinical rotations in medical school, and might as well just not have done them.
- Evbn 14y ago
  Of course, the same can be said for at least two years of pre-medschool time in college.
- jseliger 14y ago
  >This is a fantastic idea. True, but the really radical shift would come from another direction, as I wrote in a separate comment: It would also be a good idea to move toward a more European-style system that creates an alternate path to the M.D. by making the first two years of med school equivalent to an undergrad major. So a student at, say, the University of Washington could do their first two years of med school from 20 – 22, their second two from 22 – 24, and a three-year residency afterwards, leaving them with less debt (because they'd pay undergrad tuition) and with a faster path to an actual career. This sort of thing is hugely important to me because I wrote an essay called "Why you should become a nurse or physicians assistant instead of a doctor: the underrated perils of medical school" (http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-become-a-nurse-or-physicians-assistant-instead-of-a-doctor-the-underrated-perils-of-medical-school/ http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-beco...) which explains what numerous med students, residents, and doctors say they wish someone had told them.
dr_ 14y ago
Odd. Medical School was one area where four years actually seemed appropriate to consume the amt of knowledge necessary. As opposed to 4 years of college. To be honest, it's really residency training programs that have become too long. You pretty much know what you need to know to become a PCP after two years of residency training in primary care. And I'm not sure if you really need 6 years of post medical school training to become a cardiologist or gastroenterologist. Seems like 4 would be enough. But the people who make these decisions, like the American Board of Medical Specialties, won't hear of this. In an era of rising tuition rates and declining reimbursements, they need to reconsider what not only makes for a reliable practitioner, but also one that isn't drowning in debt for years. Otherwise many of our best and brightest will mostly pursue other professions.
- delinka 14y ago
  "But the people who make these decisions [...] won't hear of this." I'd bet lawyers are to blame here. At least partially. Sure you can wax conspiratorial about lawyers in cahoots with doctors or something ... but malpractice. I'm sure there's a case somewhere that a plaintiff's lawyer attempted to go after a doctor's training institution as well as the doctor.
  - anigbrowl 14y ago
    I'm equally sure there isn't.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  Remember that residents are a cheap source of labor. They are overworked and underpaid. Changing the status quo is not in the interests of those in power.
- jseliger 14y ago
  >To be honest, it's really residency training programs that have become too long This is true, but it would also be a good idea to move toward a more European-style system that creates an alternate path to the M.D. by making the first two years of med school equivalent to an undergrad major. So a student at, say, the University of Washington could do their first two years of med school from 20 – 22, their second two from 22 – 24, and a three-year residency afterwards, leaving them with less debt (because they'd pay undergrad tuition) and with a faster path to an actual career. This sort of thing is hugely important to me because I wrote an essay called "Why you should become a nurse or physicians assistant instead of a doctor: the underrated perils of medical school" (http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-become-a-nurse-or-physicians-assistant-instead-of-a-doctor-the-underrated-perils-of-medical-school/ http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-beco...) which explains what numerous med students, residents, and doctors say they wish someone had told them. Part of the essay includes this: Once I realized how nasty the residency match process is and how fundamentally unfair the labor market for residents is, I was shocked: residency programs have formed a cartel designed to control cost and reduce employee autonomy, and hence salaries. I only went to law school for a year, by accident, but even I know enough law and history to recognize a very clear situation of the sort that anti-trust laws are supposed to address in order to protect workers. When my friend entered the match process like a mouse into a snake’s mouth, I became curious, because the system’s cruelty, exploitation, and unfairness to residents is an obvious example of employers banding together to harm employees. Lawyers often get a bad rap in our society, and sometimes for good reasons, but a case like this looked ripe to me. It turns out that I’m not a legal genius and that lawyers have noticed this anti-trust violation. So an anti-trust lawsuit was filed. You can read about it in the NYTimes, including a grimly hilarious line about how “The defendants say the Match is intended to help students and performs a valuable service.” Ha! A valuable service to employers, since employees effectively can’t quit or negotiate with individual employers. Yes, indeed, curtailing employee power by distorting markets is a valuable service. The article also noted this bit of regulatory capture:
aheilbut 14y ago
McMaster University (in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has had a well-regarded 3-year MD program for a very long time.
arn 14y ago
As someone who went to medical school, this makes a lot of sense. 4th year of medical school was filled with elective time and could have been mostly skipped. Don't think combining that year with others would be hard at all. On the other hand I don't necessarily agree that residencies necessarily need to be shorter ( as someone else commented here ) At least, im not sure to what advantage it would serve. Residency is a matter of real life on-the-job experience. You can start graduating people early but then you are just graduating less experienced people. It's hard to compress the same work experience in a shorter amount of time, at least with the hours restrictions that are in place. And unlike my 4th year of medical school, my residency had much less downtime.

This is a fantastic idea. It's interesting that they are starting by making it available to people going into primary care, though, for which the final two years will be most useful. My specialist physician friends say that they basically restarted their training in residency. In particular, I have pathologist friends who say they almost never use knowledge from their clinical rotations in medical school, and might as well just not have done them.

Evbn 14y ago
Of course, the same can be said for at least two years of pre-medschool time in college.
jseliger 14y ago
>This is a fantastic idea. True, but the really radical shift would come from another direction, as I wrote in a separate comment: It would also be a good idea to move toward a more European-style system that creates an alternate path to the M.D. by making the first two years of med school equivalent to an undergrad major. So a student at, say, the University of Washington could do their first two years of med school from 20 – 22, their second two from 22 – 24, and a three-year residency afterwards, leaving them with less debt (because they'd pay undergrad tuition) and with a faster path to an actual career. This sort of thing is hugely important to me because I wrote an essay called "Why you should become a nurse or physicians assistant instead of a doctor: the underrated perils of medical school" (http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-become-a-nurse-or-physicians-assistant-instead-of-a-doctor-the-underrated-perils-of-medical-school/ http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-beco...) which explains what numerous med students, residents, and doctors say they wish someone had told them.

dr_ 14y ago

Odd. Medical School was one area where four years actually seemed appropriate to consume the amt of knowledge necessary. As opposed to 4 years of college. To be honest, it's really residency training programs that have become too long. You pretty much know what you need to know to become a PCP after two years of residency training in primary care. And I'm not sure if you really need 6 years of post medical school training to become a cardiologist or gastroenterologist. Seems like 4 would be enough. But the people who make these decisions, like the American Board of Medical Specialties, won't hear of this. In an era of rising tuition rates and declining reimbursements, they need to reconsider what not only makes for a reliable practitioner, but also one that isn't drowning in debt for years. Otherwise many of our best and brightest will mostly pursue other professions.

delinka 14y ago
"But the people who make these decisions [...] won't hear of this." I'd bet lawyers are to blame here. At least partially. Sure you can wax conspiratorial about lawyers in cahoots with doctors or something ... but malpractice. I'm sure there's a case somewhere that a plaintiff's lawyer attempted to go after a doctor's training institution as well as the doctor.
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  I'm equally sure there isn't.
w1ntermute 14y ago
Remember that residents are a cheap source of labor. They are overworked and underpaid. Changing the status quo is not in the interests of those in power.
jseliger 14y ago
>To be honest, it's really residency training programs that have become too long This is true, but it would also be a good idea to move toward a more European-style system that creates an alternate path to the M.D. by making the first two years of med school equivalent to an undergrad major. So a student at, say, the University of Washington could do their first two years of med school from 20 – 22, their second two from 22 – 24, and a three-year residency afterwards, leaving them with less debt (because they'd pay undergrad tuition) and with a faster path to an actual career. This sort of thing is hugely important to me because I wrote an essay called "Why you should become a nurse or physicians assistant instead of a doctor: the underrated perils of medical school" (http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-become-a-nurse-or-physicians-assistant-instead-of-a-doctor-the-underrated-perils-of-medical-school/ http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/why-you-should-beco...) which explains what numerous med students, residents, and doctors say they wish someone had told them. Part of the essay includes this: Once I realized how nasty the residency match process is and how fundamentally unfair the labor market for residents is, I was shocked: residency programs have formed a cartel designed to control cost and reduce employee autonomy, and hence salaries. I only went to law school for a year, by accident, but even I know enough law and history to recognize a very clear situation of the sort that anti-trust laws are supposed to address in order to protect workers. When my friend entered the match process like a mouse into a snake’s mouth, I became curious, because the system’s cruelty, exploitation, and unfairness to residents is an obvious example of employers banding together to harm employees. Lawyers often get a bad rap in our society, and sometimes for good reasons, but a case like this looked ripe to me. It turns out that I’m not a legal genius and that lawyers have noticed this anti-trust violation. So an anti-trust lawsuit was filed. You can read about it in the NYTimes, including a grimly hilarious line about how “The defendants say the Match is intended to help students and performs a valuable service.” Ha! A valuable service to employers, since employees effectively can’t quit or negotiate with individual employers. Yes, indeed, curtailing employee power by distorting markets is a valuable service. The article also noted this bit of regulatory capture:

aheilbut 14y ago

McMaster University (in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has had a well-regarded 3-year MD program for a very long time.

arn 14y ago

As someone who went to medical school, this makes a lot of sense. 4th year of medical school was filled with elective time and could have been mostly skipped. Don't think combining that year with others would be hard at all. On the other hand I don't necessarily agree that residencies necessarily need to be shorter ( as someone else commented here ) At least, im not sure to what advantage it would serve. Residency is a matter of real life on-the-job experience. You can start graduating people early but then you are just graduating less experienced people. It's hard to compress the same work experience in a shorter amount of time, at least with the hours restrictions that are in place. And unlike my 4th year of medical school, my residency had much less downtime.