About this item:

573 Views | 0 Downloads

Author Notes:

Corresponding author: James G. Greene, Department of Neurology, 6009 Woodruff Memorial Research Building, 101 Woodruff Circle, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; Email: james.greene@emory.edu

Naymee Velez-Ruiz, MD, wrote the draft of the manuscript, including the contribution of original ideas and assisted with data analysis, editing, and completing the final manuscript.

Jaffar Khan, MD, assisted with data analysis, editing, and completing the final manuscript, including the contribution of original ideas.

James G. Greene, MD, PhD, designed the survey, analyzed the data, edited the manuscript, and prepared the final version for publication.

The authors wish to thank the AUPN for distributing the survey, specifically Henry J. Kaminski, MD, President, for advice and guidance and Laurie Dixon for administrative assistance.

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


Research Funding:

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


  • education
  • techniques
  • neurohospitalist
  • clinical specialty
  • quality

Defining the Role of the Academic Neurohospitalist in Residency Education


Journal Title:



Volume 4, Number 3


, Pages 127-132

Type of Work:

Article | Post-print: After Peer Review


Objective: We sought to better understand the potential impact of the burgeoning neurohospitalist model of inpatient care on education of neurology residents and to better define possible roles for “neurohospitalists” in residency education. Method: We designed a brief qualitative open-ended survey directed toward academic leaders in neurology and distributed it by e-mail to every academic neurology department in the United States and Canada. Results: Of 83 respondents, 36 (43%) had an active neurohospitalist program and only 10% felt certain they would not have 1 within the next 5 years. All respondents expected to have residents continue to be involved with inpatient care. The main perceived advantage for resident education associated with neurohospitalists was inpatient care expertise, and the main expected disadvantage was decreased exposure to subspecialty attendings. The majority anticipated positive impact on all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies predominantly based on neurohospitalists’ expertise in the inpatient setting. Conclusion: The majority of academic neurology departments are expected to have a neurohospitalist program within the next 5 years. There are several perceived advantages and disadvantages to such a program for education of neurology residents. In general, the impact of these programs is expected to improve resident education. Regardless of expectations, neurohospitalists will likely play a prominent role in the education of the next generation of neurologists.

Copyright information:

© The Author(s) 2014

Export to EndNote