{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031462585034013606, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017857142857142856, 'mean_word_length': 5.982195845697329, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Mixed-Methods Study of Teaching Health Center Residents’ Experiences of Mentorship, Career Planning, and Postresidency Practice Environments

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Purpose The Teaching Health Center (THC) Graduate Medical Education program enables primary care physicians to train in community-based, underserved settings by shifting the payment structure and training environment for graduate medical education. To understand how THCs have successfully trained primary care physicians who practice in community-based settings, the authors conducted a mixed-methods exploratory study to examine THC residency graduates’ experiences of mentorship and career planning during their residencies, perceptions of preparation for postresidency practice, and how these experiences were related to postresidency practice environments. Method Surveys were conducted for all 804 graduating THC residents nationally, 2014–2017 (533 respondents, 66% response rate). Three quantitative outcomes were measured: graduates’ perceptions of preparation for practice after residency (Likert scale), satisfaction with mentorship and career planning (Likert scale), and characteristics of postresidency practice environment (open-ended). A qualitative analysis of open-text survey answers, using thematic content analysis, was also conducted. Results Most THC graduates (68%) were satisfied with their mentorship and career planning experience and generally felt prepared for postresidency practice in multiple settings (78%–93%). Of the 533 THC graduates who provided information about their practice environment, 445 (84%) were practicing in primary care; nationally, 64% of physicians who completed primary care residencies practiced in primary care. Of the 445 THC graduates practicing in primary care, 12% practiced in rural areas, compared with 7% of all physicians. Just over half of THC graduates (51%) practiced in medically underserved areas, compared with 39% of all physicians. Conclusions This study offers early evidence that the THC model produces and retains primary care physicians who are well prepared to practice in underserved areas. Given these promising findings, there appears to be a substantial benefit to growing the THC program. However, the program continues to face uncertainty around ongoing, stable funding.