{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021400778210116732, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005836575875486381, 'mean_word_length': 5.456066945606694, '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}}
Graduate Medical Education Funding and Curriculum in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: A Survey of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department Chairs

Abstract This national survey highlights graduate medical education funding sources for physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) residency programs as well as perceived funding stability, alignment of the current funding and educational model, the need of further education in postacute care settings, and the practice of contemporary PM&R graduates as perceived by PM&R department/division chairs. Approximately half of the reported PM&R residency positions seem to be funded by Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services; more than 40% of PM&R chairs believe that their residency program is undersized and nearly a quarter feel at risk for losing positions. A total of 30% of respondents report PM&R resident experiences in home health, 15% in long-term acute care, and 52.5% in a skilled nursing facility/subacute rehabilitation facility. In programs that do not offer these experiences, most chairs feel that this training should be included. In addition, study results suggest that most PM&R graduates work in an outpatient setting. Based on the results that chairs strongly feel the need for resident education in postacute care settings and that most graduates go on to practice in outpatient settings, there is a potential discordance for our current Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services graduate medical education funding model being linked to the acute care setting.