Mandatory Hepatology Education for Internal Medicine Residents: Long‐Term Effects and Implications for Workforce Needs

We previously created a mandatory, inpatient, hepatology resident curriculum that immediately improved comfort, knowledge, and career interest in chronic liver disease (CLD). The durability of these effects needs to be known to use this intervention to address the hepatologist shortage. Thus, we aimed to assess this curriculum’s long‐term outcomes on internal medicine (IM) residents’ CLD comfort, knowledge, and career interest. From 2015 to 2019 at a single institution, one IM resident was always assigned to the rotation. Similar anonymous assessments were administered to incoming postgraduate year (PGY)‐1 residents and graduating PGY‐3 residents, including a historic control cohort that graduated in June 2015. At residency completion, the intervention cohort (n = 61) had significantly higher comfort (1, not at all comfortable/strongly disagree; 5, very comfortable/strongly agree) with both hepatology (e.g., hepatitis C, 2.5 vs. 3.3, P < 0.001) and common IM topics (e.g., heart failure, 3.6 vs. 4.8, P < 0.001) but not specialty topics lacking curricula (e.g., inflammatory bowel disease, 2.8 vs. 2.7, P = 0.54). Compared to the historic cohort (n = 27), the intervention cohort was more comfortable in several CLD topics (e.g., cirrhosis, 3.2 vs. 3.8; P = 0.005) and answered more questions correctly (65% vs. 55%; P = 0.04), but career interest was unchanged (1.9 vs. 1.8; P = 0.45). Many residents (33%) would consider a hepatology career if training were separated from gastroenterology. Conclusion: With the completion of a mandatory hepatology curriculum, residents’ CLD comfort and knowledge durably improved and exceeded that of historic counterparts. Initial career interest was not sustained, perhaps due to prerequisite gastroenterology training. These findings suggest IM educational initiatives may better address hepatology workforce needs by generating comanagers than by recruiting trainees