[Last year of residency for oncologists: Overview and perspectives]

CONTEXT

The reform of the third cycle of medical studies in France has introduced of the "Junior Doctor" status during the concluding year of residency. We wish to evaluate its implementation for the first promotion of medical oncology residents during 2021-2022 in correlation with the published guidelines.

METHOD

AERIO conducted a cross-sectional study among French medical oncology residents. The survey was released via social networks and emails.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight of 47 residents responded. The typical week involved one to two half-days of consultation, one dedicated to clinical research, one multidisciplinary team meetings, with the rest of time being occupied by day care (mostly) and hospitalization. Teaching and quality management activities were infrequent (monthly or less). The Junior Doctors rated their overall satisfaction at 8/10. A large majority (92.5 %) felt equipped to handle most of the situations they encountered. Almost all residents (92.9 %) had negotiated with their placement supervisor prior to the selection procedure. In one third of the cases (35.7 %), the principle of mismatch between the number of residents and the number of training sites was not respected. Only 42.9 % received training in scientific writing and 82.2 % of the residents agreed on the relevance of the post-internship training modules developed in other specialties.

CONCLUSIONS

Junior doctors in medical oncology express overall satisfaction with this reform, which aligns with the recommendations. Nevertheless, certain concerns, such as selection procedure and inadequacy, along with areas requiring improvement, such as post-internship training and scientific writing, are clearly established.

[First junior doctors: State of play one year after the implementation of the consolidation phase within the diploma of specialized studies in internal medicine and clinical immunology]

INTRODUCTION

The 2017 reform of the 3rd cycle of medical studies introduced the concept of supervised autonomy with the creation of a new junior doctor (JD) status. The aim of this work was to interview the first class of JDs in internal medicine and clinical immunology (IMCI) regarding the progress and implementation of this final year of internship.

METHODS

The IMCI JDs were invited to complete an anonymous online survey, contacted by email and social networks.

RESULTS

The questionnaire received 36 responses out of an estimated fifty JDs. The majority of JDs spent more than 70% of their time on conventional hospitalisation and less than 20% on scheduled hospitalisation. Most of them would have preferred to do more consultations and provide expert counsels. Weekly working hours were not respected for the majority of JDs. Personal education and academic formation were not respected for 77.8% of JDs. Overall, 75% were satisfied with their empowerment and 88.6% felt that the transition to post residency would be easier with the consolidation phase. A third reported that their residency had confirmed their apprehension about practising as an internist, and even that this apprehension might call into question their future practice.

CONCLUSION

This survey is an initial assessment of the implementation of the JD year in the IMCI residency. A collective effort around this last year of internship seems to be essential to ensure the personal and professional development of young internists.

[Last year of residency for radiation oncologists in France: Overview and perspectives]

PURPOSE

The last year of the radiotherapy oncology internship in France has become a phase of empowerment, called "junior doctor", allowing interns to validate acts previously reserved only for senior doctors. This study focused on the responsibilities given to the first promotion of junior doctors in France and their feelings on this new status.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was carried out by the French associations of interns and young doctors in oncology, Aerio and SFjRO. A questionnaire was sent to the class referents of each city for transmission to the junior doctors of the year 2021-2022 from September 1st to November 30th, 2022. The questions concerned training, the modalities of this year and the feelings. Responses were analyzed anonymously using R. 4.3.1 software.

RESULTS

For radiation oncology, 33 responses were obtained from 21 cities. For most junior doctors, three to four localizations (51%) were performed with an average of five new patients per week. The contours were reviewed either systematically (51%) or only at the beginning (32%). Dosimetry was reported as never countersigned in 19%; 80% of junior doctors described having been the only radiation oncologist during multidisciplinary staff meetings. The two main areas of improvement were theoretical training (45%) and legal frameworks/contracts (42%).

CONCLUSION

These results relating to the first class of junior doctors showed an overall agreement with the recommendations of the Cnec. Feedback from interns was positive. The supervision of brachytherapy and dosimetry activities, the presence alone in multidisciplinary panel remained points of vigilance.