Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
 arrow  Full Text of this article Free
space
 arrow  Related articles in Annals
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

POSITION PAPER

Training in Subspecialty Internal Medicine: On the Chessboard of Health Care Reform

right arrow Association of Subspecialty Professors

15 November 1994 | Volume 121 Issue 10 | Pages 810-813

Many reform-minded observers of the U.S. health care system have asked recently whether we are training too many subspecialists in internal medicine. Of course, the answer to this question may not be the same for all subspecialties or all manners of professional career, but any proposed answer has extended consequences for the entire health care system and the patients it serves. Some have even begun to advocate a firm ceiling on the numbers of subspecialty training positions in the future. Who, in fact, should be deciding such matters? These decisions are complex and not easily made by government, consumers, or insurance companies on their own, nor should they. These decisions are best made by a profession willing to examine and regulate itself where necessary. Recent legislative initiatives have made it abundantly clear that others are more than willing to act on our behalf, if we cannot. Whatever process is adopted for making such decisions, it needs to be fair, efficient, flexible, and responsive to unexpected demands in the future, including new practice economics, the availability of research funds, and medical innovation.

Author and Article Information
space

The principles outlined in this position paper were prepared and approved by the governing Council on 17 June 1994. Council members include N. Franklin Adkinson, Jr., MD (Allergy/Immunology); Joseph S. Alpert, MD (Cardiology); D. Lynn Loriaux, MD, PhD, and Paul W. Ladenson, MD (Endocrinology); Lawrence S. Friedman, MD (Gastroenterology); Peter A. Cassileth, MD and Russel E. Kaufman, MD (Hematology); John G. Bartlett, MD and Mark S. Klempner, MD (Infectious Disease); Eric G. Neilson, MD (Nephrology); John H. Glick, MD and Robert J. Mayer, MD (Oncology); Spencer K. Koerner, MD and Edward D. Crandall, MD (Pulmonary/Critical Care); and William P. Arend, MD (Rheumatology).
Requests for Reprints: Eric G. Neilson, MD, President, Association of Subspecialty Professors, C. Mahlon Kline Professor of Medicine, 700 Clinical Research Building, University of Pennsylvania, 422 Curie Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6144.


Related articles in Annals:

Editorials
Subspecialty Leadership at a Time of Specialty Excess
Lewis G. Sandy AND Steven A. Schroeder
Annals 1994 121: 805-806. [Full Text]  






 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online 

Copyright © 1994 by the American College of Physicians.