Abstract
Disclosure: N. Francis: None. S. Cardillo: None. D.R. Nandiwada: None. Background: The training residents gain in Family Medicine (FM) and Internal Medicine (IM) residency programs provide a critical foundation for their knowledge in diabetes (DM) management. It is one of the most common diagnoses physicians-in-training will encounter in their residency training programs and in clinical settings. However, a 2012 study compared diabetes care in resident clinics versus private physicians and found significant decrease in patient satisfaction (56.5% vs. 71.3%) in resident clinics. A 2020 study surveying primary care (PC) residency program directors showed that most FM and IM residency training programs focus on the core diabetes care and management topics with much less focus on emerging topics, such as 2(nd) generation insulin analogs and digital health technologies. The purpose of our survey was to better assess current resident perceptions and attitudes towards their DM education and their perceived comfort level in comprehensive DM counseling, evaluation, and management. Methods: A 12 item survey was designed using the Qualtrics program. The survey link was sent via email to IM- PC and FM residents at a major academic medical center. Data was collected from September 13(th), 2022 to present. The survey included a combination of multiple choice, Likert scale and ranking questions. Results: 14 residents responded to the survey to date with the majority (71%) belonging to the IM-PC group and the remainder (29%) family medicine. Residents felt most comfortable managing diabetes related complications and counseling on foot and eye care and hypoglycemia. Respondents reported being most uncomfortable in prescribing non-insulin medication (50%) and initiating an insulin regimen (43%) and less comfortable counseling patients on continuous glucose monitoring systems (83%) and insulin administration (66%). While majority of residents (72%) found their DM curriculum clinically relevant, 85% of residents reported there was not enough time allotted. Respondents felt a more longitudinal lecture series, with increased access to treatment frameworks and on-site feedback on their DM counseling and care would best supplement their DM curriculum. Conclusion: This survey data explores specific areas that residents have identified as being least comfortable and also expresses what they identified as the most preferable ways to modify and design an educational intervention. This information allows for tailored curricular intervention highlighting diabetes technologies, insulin and non-insulin prescribing practice in a longitudinal lecture style format that provides access to DM treatment frameworks and incorporates direct on-site feedback to the residents. This provides evidence for the development of a novel clinically integrated DM curriculum. Presentation: Thursday, June 15, 2023