Incentives for scholarly activity at university and independent general surgery residencies: current practices

BackgroundTeaching physicians and academic medical centers may find it more difficult to meet clinical productivity expectations and still contribute to scholarly activity in the present economic climate of health care.MethodsA multiquestion survey was developed and distributed via the Association of Program Directors in Surgery list-serve.ResultsThere were 80 respondents (31% response rate), 29 university program (UP), 43 independent program (IP), and 8 “other.” Although most programs had designated teaching faculty (72% UP, 93% IP), the trend was not to compensate for scholarly activity whether voluntary (100% UP, 91% IP), employed (82% UP, 74% IP), or contracted (57% UP, 85% IP; P = not specified). Most (69% UP, 75% IP) programs had no incentives for scholarly activities, despite dissatisfaction with involvement of volunteer faculty (19% UP, 55% IP; P = .04). Most compensation plans (79% UP, 66% IP) were discretionary or atypical.ConclusionsMost programs, UP and IP, did not compensate for scholarly activity for teaching faculty. There was a significant proportion that believed compensation would improve teaching efforts.