Background: After passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, herbs and other supplements were allowed to be sold to the public without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval or premarket evaluation. Data suggest that many people are unaware of this lack of governmental oversight and may rely on their physicians for education in this arena. This study was designed to evaluate physicians' level of understanding of dietary supplement regulation and the adverse event reporting process and to determine whether an interactive online curriculum could aid in improving knowledge.Methods: A multicenter online educational intervention was developed and administered to physicians at 15 internal medicine residency programs throughout the United States between March 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006. Pretest performance was used to measure baseline knowledge, while posttest performance compared with pretest performance measured the effectiveness of the educational intervention.Results: A total of 335 physicians completed the module. Ninety percent of those completing the module were residents, while 10% were attending physicians. Baseline knowledge of dietary supplement regulatory issues was poor. The total average pretest score was only 59% (986/1675). The average score rose to 91% (1526/1675) after completion of the curriculum (PϽ.001). With regard to specific content areas, about one third of physicians were unaware that dietary supplements did not require FDA approval or submission of safety and efficacy data before being marketed. Similar percentages believed that there are regulations in place toensuresupplementquality.Mostphysicianswereunaware that serious adverse events due to the use of supplements should be reported through the FDA MedWatch system.Conclusions: Physician knowledge of dietary supplement regulation and adverse event reporting is poor. An online didactic module may improve knowledge and potentially enhance patient-physician communication regarding the use of such products.

Background: To determine the effect of duty-hour limitations, it is important to consider the views of faculty who have the most contact with residents. Method: We conducted a national survey of key clinical faculty (KCF) at 39 internal medicine residency programs affiliated with US medical schools selected by random sample stratified by federal research funding and program size to elicit their views on the effect of dutyhour limitations on residents' patient care, education, professionalism, and well-being and on faculty workload and satisfaction. Results: Of 154 KCF surveyed, 111 (72%) responded. The KCF reported worsening in residents' continuity of care (87%) and the physician-patient relationship (75%). Faculty believed that residents' education (66%) and professionalism, including accountability to patients (73%) and ability to place patient needs above self-interests (57%), worsened, yet 50% thought residents' well-being improved. The KCF reported spending more time providing inpatient services (47%). Faculty noted decreased satisfaction with teaching (56%), ability to develop relationships with residents (40%), and overall career satisfaction (31%). In multivariate analysis, KCF with 5 years of teaching experience or more were more likely to perceive a negative effect of duty hours on residents' education (odds ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-7.00). Conclusions: Key clinical faculty believe that dutyhour limitations have adversely affected important aspects of residents' patient care, education, and professionalism, as well as faculty workload and satisfaction. Residency programs should continue to look for ways to optimize experiences for residents and faculty within the confines of the duty-hour requirements.

Key clincal faculty report concerns about the impact of duty hour regulations on aspects of medical students' education in internal medicine. Medical schools and residency programs should identify ways to ensure optimal educational experiences for students within duty hour requirements.

Physician knowledge of the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) guidelines is unknown and may contribute to the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension. Our objective was to determine physician knowledge of JNC 7 guidelines and whether online instruction could improve knowledge. A pretest served as baseline knowledge, and comparison with a post-test after completing an online didactic demonstrated improvement in knowledge. Participants included 1280 physicians at 45 internal medicine residency training programs. Average baseline knowledge of six concepts of hypertension was 51.2%. Attending physicians performed better than trainees on some but not all concepts (p<0.05). Third-year post-graduate trainees performed better than first-year trainees on some but not all concepts (p<0.05). Knowledge increased significantly on all concepts after completing the curriculum (p<0.05). The authors demonstrated that physician knowledge of JNC 7 guidelines is poor but can be improved by an online curriculum. Further study is needed to determine the impact of physician education on clinical outcomes in individuals with hypertension.