MGH vs. BWH vs. BID

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
E

ether

Junior Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
33
Reaction score
1
Members do not see this ad.
Hey all,

Just wondering what u guys thought or more specifically heard about the differences about the three harvard programs??

Thanks in advance.
 
The three Harvard programs (Brigham, MGH, and Beth Isreal Deaconess) are proabably more similar than different. All three provide a well rounded general anesthesia experience with few distinct differences.

All three do peds at Children's in Boston. MGH probably has more attendings that are active in research, while Brigham's OB anesthesia service is well respected (with OB at BID close behind). BID's interventional pain management exposure/fellowship is probably the best in the eastern US. MGH's critical care fellowship is probably the best in Boston.

A difference possibly lies in the personal interactions between residents, anesthesia attendings, and surgical attendings. On you interviews be sure to ask the residents about their thoughts on the people they have to work with everyday.
 
i think you meant to say BWH has one of the best interventional programs on the east coast?
 
Thanks, but no, I meant Beth Israel Deaconess when I was describing it as one of the best interventional pain management experiences on the east coast (although BW does provide a strong pain experience).


Also, I would recommend asking any program (Harvard or otherwise) a follow-up question to how many procedures/cases are performed at the institution -- "how many fellows are at the institution?" While fellowships are important and add something significant to a program, the fellows also compete with residents for cases/procedures.
 
really... please tell me more about BID - never heard of their pain program! and i have been snooping around 🙂
 
Tenesma

What would you like to know? I can pass along any information that I know/can find out. Are you planning on completing a pain fellowship after your residency?
 
The Beth Israel Deaconess fellowship training is very interventional in nature. Patients that cannot be treated interventionally are either passed to a NP/PA with official MD recommendations or are passed back to the referring physician with official BID pain recommendations. This is to prevent the fellows from spending their time writing monthly scripts for kadian/oxycontin and more time in the fluoro rooms and ORs.

Brigham's pain dept just this summer came to their senses and finally stopped managing ALL of the PCAs in the hospital but still care for complicated patients on PCAs. Brigham fellows do receive decent interventional training, but spend a significant amount of time with followups/drug refills.

I would have to agree that BI's pain management fellowship is one of the more highly regarded pain management fellowships nationally.
 
Going to school in Boston and planning on staying for anesthesia training in Boston, I have been able to spend varying amounts of time at all three Harvard programs. Sleepydoc is pretty much on the money with his comparisons of the three programs. I will add a few more comparisons.

Pain-BID is head and shoulders above the other two and has one of the most renowned pain fellowships in the country. When third year residents rotate through on their electives they are treated like fellows. Both BWH and BID gave up following PCA patients. They have become so simple that even surgeons can use them!

OB-BWH has the biggest OB program in the city with BID second. MGH used to send their residents to the other two programs, but recently opened their own OB program which is still getting off the ground.

ICU-MGH has the best anesthesia ICU experience in the city followed closely by BID. They are both anesthesia dominated units while the BWH units are surgically run with little to no anesthesia representation (read-open units) They are in general a miserable experience for the anesthesia resident.

Peds-All same at Boston's Children Hospital.Some peds is also done at MGH. Children Hospital is in a word amazing.

Another thing mentioned astutely by sleepydoc is to ask about the amount of anesthesia fellows in the program. BWH and MGH are full of them. BID, outside of pain, only has a couple. As a resident, you will compete with fellows for big cases. At BID I saw first year residents doing cardiac and vascular cases like AAA's. BID gets the reputation of not having the caseload or case mix as the other two hospitals. This is not true. Because BID has less residents than the other programs and their ORs do just about as many cases as the other two places, the residents get better selection of bigger cases much earlier on in their residency program. BID has more attendings working in the ORs while the other two programs have their attendings doing 1-2 days of research outside the OR. When I was rotating through BID as a student, there were some attendings working by themselves. As a student it was great for me because there was no resident around so I got to do alot (even a cardiac case). Because they have more working attendings, BID is able to relieve their residents to go afternoon lecture.

Speaking of cardiac anestheia, all three programs are solid. BWH has recently lost some of their heart surgeons and may be having some difficulty. BID TEE program is the best of the three and one of the best in the country.

Bottom line all three are similar in quality. You can't go wrong training at anyone of them. Just depends what type of environent you want to work in.
 
as far as MGH goes, there is absolutely no competition with fellows except for the pain month (where some of the fellows hog procedures, but you still get a decen amount of interventional techniques in your pocket)... as a resident you do your own cardiac, vascular and thoracic cases with absolutely no fellows in the room (except for when TEE is done, then the fellow comes in and reads it, and then leaves).

otherwise i agree with beantowns assessment
 
I just wanted to say, that I think that some of the statements made regarding BWH, are not necessarily accurate. Cardiac numbers at all academic centers have been in decline, but the volume at BWH is as high as anywhere else in Boston. They do an extremely high percentage of valvular surgery, whereas the norm elsewhere is to do predominantly bypass surgery. The ICUs have good anesthesia presence. The units were fully open and surgery run a few years ago, but now the ICU team directs care. The surgical team still rounds daily on the patient, but does not dictate the plan of care. All three programs are very good, and I cannot comment on BID or MGH as I am not doing residency there; but I just wanted to clarify some of the statements regarding BWH, as I have had lots of time to get to know the program.
 
I've heard some rumors from Boston-area residents that their friends at BWH report doubling up of residents in rooms because there are too many residents for too few cases. Can anyone verify this?
 
There is truth to the doubling up of residents with other residents or fellows. BW Anesthesia department is currently in the process of trying to decant some of their residents to a nearby private practice hospital because of this problem. That private 's anesthesia group is run by the same private practice that runs the BU's Anesthesia sweatshop, I mean residency program. (See BU vs. BI thread) I'm sure this private groups mouth is watering about the prospect of getting cheap labor:meanie:
 
I've got a few friends at the Brigham and they say no way.

The only time u are doubled up on a case is if it is one of the really big cases in which a fellow is also there. In those cases they say the fellow for the most part are very hands off and let u do everything and more or less make sure the pt. doesn't go south.

So, the rumor sounds just like that a rumor.

(p.s. they also say the reason to rotate through another hospital, which is not for sure yet, is too actually increase the regional exp. and not just for the sake of having u work at another "sweatshop".)
 
I can assure you all that these rumors are just that, ...rumors. I have only been doubled up with a resident, during the tutorial period of CA1 year. Otherwise there is not the personnel to do that. Occassionally two senior residents will be paired to do a AAA repair, but that is the exception. I have heard rumors that BWH is going to have a presence at a local community hospital. The politics and rationale for that are unknown to me. It is not to displace residents, as there is plenty of workload at BWH. To be honest I wouldn't mind seeing a private practice environment. It can be misleading to always see an academic style practice. It is always nice to know what you are getting into if you pursue private practice. Frankly, I don't care about BWH residency recruitment, it isn't going to affect me, but some of the rumors that are circulated about this and that program are ridiculous. I guess you have to take everything with a grain of salt.
 
Not to beat a dead horse, but I heard today from a senior resident at the Brigham, that just about every cardiac case and every thoracic case, has a senior resident/fellow paired up with a junior resident. I am 100% sure that this person is telling me the truth. Now as a resident in training I want to have my own cases.
Even getting paired up in a AAA (ruptured I can see) is not acceptable to me.
 
I would say it is variable as to whether a cardiac case or thoracic case will have a fellow and a resident or not. Any program with fellows is going to have fellows involved in cases. Usually for cardiac, the fellow only helps by putting in an IV while you do the aline preop. Then they busy themselves with the TEE, and you are the only one paying attention to the patient. Thoracics is variable depending on the number of fellows on service, but BWH does a lot more thoracics than most institutions. As for AAA's, these are the only cases I know of where residents may be paired up with other residents, outside of fresh CA1's. The reason for this, I think; is two fold. First the number of AAA's at BWH is not high, so it behooves residents to get exposure to them when they can. Secondly they are busy cases with a lot of manual labor that benefits from a second pair of capable hands. So I guess if you only want to do AAA's by yourself than this is an issue, but its not like you are paired with other residents for a lot of cases. Every institution has its strong and weak points, BWH does not have a lot of vascular surgery, and therefore there are not tons of AAA's for every resident. Anyways, for what is worth, my 2 cents.
 
albie, I see your point but from my experience, an unruptured AAA does not require an extra pair of hands. Even at the VA, we can do it all ourselves including the TEE and still have ample time to sit and read.
 
at MGH there is no competition with fellows --- they don't even put in IVs. You do everything here, and on cardiac you will do your own TEE exam (under the guidance of the attending).
On thoracic there are NO fellows and we do TWICE the amount of thoracic of most programs (the thoracic surgeons are crazy here - they will do anything --- i wonder how many other residents at other programs have routinely done tracheal resection & reconstructions, or carinal mass resections???)
On Vascular there are NO fellows (but there is a senior resident who gets to do an extra month who will do the ruptured thoracos if necessary), so you get a decent amount of exposure - as well as on call, it isn't unusual to get ruptured AAA/TAAs overnight. Now there is a trend towards endovascular repairs (which are painful to watch), but we are one of only 4 centers that do complex elective TAA repairs.... so there is always exposure...

as far as manual labor - we have anesthesia nurses in the busy rooms that do the blood draws/ABGs, etc... and we have an electronic charting form, so we just concentrate on the anesthesia and the hemodynamics.... like it should be.... 🙂
 
Just wanted to see if anyone has any new opinions or if there has been changes since this thread 6 years ago. It would be extremely helpful to get some new information!
 
I have nothing new to say, only old stuff: when I rotated through Boston Children's in 1977, I was exposed to residents from all Harvard programs and I was amazed at the quality of the Beth Israel residents. I don't know how they are now, but at the time they were clearly the best. They told me that each resident had always an attending attached to him or her constantly and they did everything together, so that, on the one hand, they had immediate feedback on everything they did, which helped greatly with the learning process and the learning curve, and on the other hand, since they were not alone, there was no need to limit the scope of their cases and they were exposed earlier to big and complex cases, so that a junior resident would do all kinds of stuff, which normally wouldn't happen in other residencies, and that would keep the interest and the excitement always up and motivate them to read more and learn more. If I had to recommend a program to anyone, the Beth Israel would be my first choice.

Of course, things may have changed since 1977, but I would tell you to take a good look at that program.
 
During the interview at MGH the residents bashed Cardiac in their own institution. Various of them said that if you are thinking of doing Cardiac anesthesia, maybe you should not go to MGH. They also said that they would not get cardiac surgery at MGH if they needed to. Any thoughts?
 
buuuuump again

I thought I would be happy at any of the three. I'm assuming the outside hospital for BWH alluded to 8 years ago was Faulkner. My impression of BWH was not that they were doubling up but that they were very busy with their own rooms as they have essentially no CRNAs. MGH definitely has a different flavor than the other two, but not necessarily good or bad but noticeably different. I really have nothing objective to add to this discussion but maybe somebody else does.
 
I love all three for various reasons yet they all hold their negative aspects.

As for the cardiac anesthesia at MGH, they did not bash it when I was there but most residents were pretty open as to how awful the cardiac surgeons can be. But then again, the ONLY hospital that has "decent" cardiac surgeons has been Penn.

Is anyone else concerned about the number of CRNAs that MGH has? Seems like the Dr. W-K is very pro-CRNAs. I've seen another program that also has 30 and they were pretty open as to how they distribute complicated cases to the CRNAs also. I suspect the shear number gave them strength to protest. Not that it would be unfair if CRNA took over a complicated case because there weren't enough residents but this program was truly open as to being "fair" to all residents and CRNAs, thus taking away good cases from the residents.
 
I'm not at MGH, but I'm not sure why CRNAs would want to do complicated cases. They get paid the same either way. We have CRNAs (no SRNAs) at my program, and they are very happy to do MRI or eyeballs all day long. Their definition of "good case" is one that interrupts their completion of the crossword the least.

Most of our cardiac surgeons are quite pleasant, so perhaps I am just at a residency in Bizarro World.



SuperHiro said:
I love all three for various reasons yet they all hold their negative aspects.

As for the cardiac anesthesia at MGH, they did not bash it when I was there but most residents were pretty open as to how awful the cardiac surgeons can be. But then again, the ONLY hospital that has "decent" cardiac surgeons has been Penn.

Is anyone else concerned about the number of CRNAs that MGH has? Seems like the Dr. W-K is very pro-CRNAs. I've seen another program that also has 30 and they were pretty open as to how they distribute complicated cases to the CRNAs also. I suspect the shear number gave them strength to protest. Not that it would be unfair if CRNA took over a complicated case because there weren't enough residents but this program was truly open as to being "fair" to all residents and CRNAs, thus taking away good cases from the residents.
Click to expand...
 
lord_jeebus said:
I'm not at MGH, but I'm not sure why CRNAs would want to do complicated cases. They get paid the same either way. We have CRNAs (no SRNAs) at my program, and they are very happy to do MRI or eyeballs all day long. Their definition of "good case" is one that interrupts their completion of the crossword the least.

Most of our cardiac surgeons are quite pleasant, so perhaps I am just at a residency in Bizarro World.
Click to expand...

Good point. I guess I should also have mentioned that my example is NOT the vibe I got from MGH during my visit. Dr. W-K seems pretty clear about the teaching cases going to residents. Perhaps I'm making a fuss over nothing.
 
SuperHiro said:
Good point. I guess I should also have mentioned that my example is NOT the vibe I got from MGH during my visit. Dr. W-K seems pretty clear about the teaching cases going to residents. Perhaps I'm making a fuss over nothing.
Click to expand...

The reason MGH has "a lot" of CRNAs these days is simply a manpower issue: the administration is trying hard to maximize the residents' educational experience within the proscribed duty hours, and there simply aren't enough residents to cover every room every day. So we have CRNAs. Usually, the residents get to pick the cases they want and the CRNAs get assigned to the other rooms. On vascular, thoracic, cardiac, etc, there aren't any CRNAs. There is no "pro-CRNA" stance at MGH, but we do work harmoniously with them, and appreciate their help in getting residents out on time in the afternoon. (We have many CRNAs who work 3p-11p to help out the call team during the busy evening hours as late rooms finish up and new urgent/emergent cases roll in.) I also appreciate having CRNAs around when I want to cherry-pick the best educational experience. One night on call, I was working in a room that had a fairly straightforward, non-educational case on the waitlist to follow. My attending pulled me from that room to go do a much more exciting and educational case in another room, and stuck a CRNA in my place. I was very grateful to have CRNAs in our department that night since I ultimately benefited from being able to get a great case in while on call.

MGH is not perfect, but it is an excellent program. You can message me with questions.
 
Bump for updated opinions on Brigham & Women's. thank you very much to anyone who's able to help!
 
Have heard MGH is overworked, often even exceeding the 80hour work limit. A possible reason why they keep receiving sub-stellar ACGME reviews/accreditations. Any input on this?
 
Here was my impression of the boston programs in general... I think that the market in Boston is oversaturated, which results in three programs that are very solid with good research, but some relative deficiencies at each place. BI is small and doesn't do heart/lung transplants, and the residents said they had some difficulty getting thoracic numbers (though it appears that they have addressed this by doing thoracic at the VA). Brigham does little trauma and doesn't do livers. MGH is probably the best of the three, but is known to have a somewhat malignant atmosphere on here at least (I cancelled my BW and MGH interviews, so take that with a grain of salt). I have been more impressed with programs that serve as the sole tertiary referral center for large areas (think duke, mayo, washu, etc.)... but again... I don't have any first-hand experience with BW or MGH.
 
beardpapa said:
Have heard MGH is overworked, often even exceeding the 80hour work limit. A possible reason why they keep receiving sub-stellar ACGME reviews/accreditations. Any input on this?
Click to expand...

Most recent ACGME decision to grant 3 yr cycle - the worst possible was due to residents being overworked - I am assuming this means 80+ hour logs. Program director describes it as the Service-Education Tension. (Should residents be there to provide service versus get education). Changes have been made - hiring more CRNAs, reducing some calls, but he admits the problem is not yet fixed. Relatively new chair Janine says its her vision to get the residents out of the OR more so they can grow in other perioperative areas + more life balance. That being said, residents I spoke with reported 70, 80, even 90 hour work weeks (these were CA1s). Supposedly take even more call as CA2 and CA3.
 
bcat85 said:
Here was my impression of the boston programs in general... I think that the market in Boston is oversaturated, which results in three programs that are very solid with good research, but some relative deficiencies at each place. BI is small and doesn't do heart/lung transplants, and the residents said they had some difficulty getting thoracic numbers (though it appears that they have addressed this by doing thoracic at the VA). Brigham does little trauma and doesn't do livers. MGH is probably the best of the three, but is known to have a somewhat malignant atmosphere on here at least (I cancelled my BW and MGH interviews, so take that with a grain of salt). I have been more impressed with programs that serve as the sole tertiary referral center for large areas (think duke, mayo, washu, etc.)... but again... I don't have any first-hand experience with BW or MGH.
Click to expand...

👍
 
The "best" program in Boston is the "best" program that fits your goals and personality. All programs will have you come out as good anesthesiologists, but the thing that makes a program stand out is one that fosters your interests and career/research goals. Most people from other states don't even know that there are 3 hospitals in the Harvard system, much less care about the purported differences in reputation.

BIDMC definitely tops the list in specialties like pain, but it is also a forerunner in many other areas including resident education (which is why you go to residency in the first place, right?). There are no "Service-Education tensions" because resident education is a priority. Some new initiatives include: TEE simulation (residents are taking intensive courses to become TEE certified by the time they graduate) and afternoon didactics 3-4 times per week that are available online. Residents also are involved in policy, global health, and research rotations. BIDMC grads get their top choices in all of the fellowships and support from attendings who have connections across the country to find jobs in a competetive market.

Hope this helps!
 
Last edited:
MGH CA-1 here. Interviewed at all three of the Boston programs, and absolutely fell in love with the MGH residency program. It's true that work hours are long at MGH, and that one learns to become autonomous very quickly (in the face of little tolerance for incompetence or intellectual laziness), but there is absolutely no other place I'd rather be.

Although MGH has strengths in clinical rigor (only Trauma I center among the Harvard programs) and academic research, the best thing I like about MGH is the people that you get to work with. Attendings are vocal and advocate for residents during operations. Senior residents take time out of their day to act as 'big brothers' or 'big sisters' to residents. Co-residents often switch call days so that peers can attend functions -- one day my chief resident actually covered my OR responsibilities for me to attend an important event.

I completely agree with macy's statement that 'The "best" program in Boston is the "best" program that fits your goals and personality.'. If you are hard-working, eager to learn, and want to be a rock star anesthesiologist, you should seriously check out MGH 😉
 
checkov said:
MGH CA-1 here. Interviewed at all three of the Boston programs, and absolutely fell in love with the MGH residency program. It's true that work hours are long at MGH, and that one learns to become autonomous very quickly (in the face of little tolerance for incompetence or intellectual laziness), but there is absolutely no other place I'd rather be.

Although MGH has strengths in clinical rigor (only Trauma I center among the Harvard programs) and academic research, the best thing I like about MGH is the people that you get to work with. Attendings are vocal and advocate for residents during operations. Senior residents take time out of their day to act as 'big brothers' or 'big sisters' to residents. Co-residents often switch call days so that peers can attend functions -- one day my chief resident actually covered my OR responsibilities for me to attend an important event.

I completely agree with macy's statement that 'The "best" program in Boston is the "best" program that fits your goals and personality.'. If you are hard-working, eager to learn, and want to be a rock star anesthesiologist, you should seriously check out MGH 😉
Click to expand...

Actually all 3 are Level 1 trauma centers.
 
Last edited:
"Actually all 3 are Level 1 trauma centers."

Perhaps, but only one has a Emergency Helipad...
 
pgy13 said:
Yes, BIDMC
Click to expand...
Oops, didn't even realize that!

Perhaps, but when ABC decided to film "Boston Med" last year they conveniently left one Harvard 'trauma' hospital out...
 
In terms of pain management, specifically interventional:


1) BWH-- more pumps, stims, blocks then all 3 of the programs. Huge associate w/ Dana Farber for Cancer Pain Mgt as well.

2) BID--- second in terms of interventions

3) MGH

All have research in pain. BWH and MGH probably are more known for their research, not only for interventions, but also pain psychology,etc.

It is true that all 3 rotate through children's for their Pain experience.

In terms of anesthesia. I think overall everyone I've talked to at BWH loves it there. They are relieved at a reasonable hour, attendings are all nice and people are easy going. As someone mentioned earlier, MGH appears to have a more 'malignant' atmosphere associated w/ it. However, I think it's still a solid program.
 
Exposure is one thing, but as a RESIDENT you're probably not putting in pumps, stimulators, etc at any of these places. The pain fellows will make sure of that. As has been discussed ad naseum in this thread, all 3 will provide you with more than adequate training to say the least. Look, ultimately the reason I picked my choice of residency was to be able to secure a nice job. In terms of name recognition/prestige you can't go wrong with MGH (in my opinion MGH > BWH > BID). This is especially the case for those looking outside of Boston in desirable saturated markets/ big cities/ west coast. Local attending connections, grad networks are nice to have, but I found little need for it when the time came to look for a job. Fair or not, having MGH on your resume WILL get you in the door. Of course what you do afterwards is entirely up to you...

For what it's worth, at least when I was there, the overwhelming majority of Harvard SOM grads chose Mass Gen.
 
They're all great, at least in recent years I think more HMS people have gone to the Brigham but that isn't a big enough sample size to make any decisions about. MGH definitely has a different flavor. The people who train there always talk in vagueries about how the 'name' helps them more, because, you know, no one has ever heard of the other two. The problem isn't that it's malignant because plenty of programs are, the issue is that the culture there is to take pride in it. Different strokes I guess
 
From what I've heard, BWH is now the hip and progressive place to be in the Harvard systems. MGH has historically been the heavy hitter but has come out of favor due to it not keeping up with the times and having their residents overworked (see: service-education tensions) and as a result, receiving only 3 year ACGME accreditations for the past 2 cycles. And MGH tends to cover it up by saying "we are well-trained when we graduate and we learn to be very autonomous." Let's face it, you will be well-trained in anesthesiology at the majority of programs because everyone has to hit their numbers to receive accreditation. The one reason that MGH may be more attractive is their tradition of research. If you are thinking you'd like to do A LOT of research during your residency, it may suit you better. That being said, I know BWH and BID also has lots of opportunities for research as well. The Brigham has the best mix of education and personality of all three systems. And the national recognition of BWH is up there too so you don't have to worry about future jobs nationally either.
 
Last edited:
This is kind of an aside, but has anybody else had my experience? Inevitably an applicant will ask what the work hours, accreditation citations, etc are, but even if the PD answers the question, I've heard a few PDs say "by the way you can look all that stuff up online. Its public information." Well am I missing it, or is that stuff public information? I see you can look up the years for accreditation cycle on the ACGME website, but nothing about hours, citations, etc. Just wondering.

ashkenazi1234 said:
Wondering if anybody knows why the 2 yr accreditation for bwh
Click to expand...
 
Libertas said:
This is kind of an aside, but has anybody else had my experience? Inevitably an applicant will ask what the work hours, accreditation citations, etc are, but even if the PD answers the question, I've heard a few PDs say "by the way you can look all that stuff up online. Its public information." Well am I missing it, or is that stuff public information? I see you can look up the years for accreditation cycle on the ACGME website, but nothing about hours, citations, etc. Just wondering.
Click to expand...

The PD is talking about FRIEDA which provides some stats, but nothing like we really need. Best source is the residents.
 
I think the most recent ACGME accreditation cycles speak for themselves:
BIDMC - 5 years
MGH - 3 years
BWH - 2 years

For those who don't know, these numbers are the best way to evaluate the current state of a program. The ACGME's residency review committee visits a program, and depending on what they find, they will reschedule a visit within 2-5 years. If they feel that a program is up to par and that there are no issues to followup on, they will return in 5 years. But if they find issues in a program that need followup, they will schedule another site visit sooner to see if that program has worked on the things that need fixing. As an applicant, I was strongly advised to apply only to programs with 4 or 5 year accreditation cycles. Why go into a program knowing that there are problems with the residency review committee?
 
You are right. The AANA will claim equivalence between MDA and CRNA except for those who graduated from Brigham so they won't have to worry "nationally" about jobs...😉



beardpapa said:
From what I've heard, BWH is now the hip and progressive place to be in the Harvard systems. MGH has historically been the heavy hitter but has come out of favor due to it not keeping up with the times and having their residents overworked (see: service-education tensions) and as a result, receiving only 3 year ACGME accreditations for the past 2 cycles. And MGH tends to cover it up by saying "we are well-trained when we graduate and we learn to be very autonomous." Let's face it, you will be well-trained in anesthesiology at the majority of programs because everyone has to hit their numbers to receive accreditation. The one reason that MGH may be more attractive is their tradition of research. If you are thinking you'd like to do A LOT of research during your residency, it may suit you better. That being said, I know BWH and BID also has lots of opportunities for research as well. The Brigham has the best mix of education and personality of all three systems. And the national recognition of BWH is up there too so you don't have to worry about future jobs nationally either. They always say, "if the Brigham calls, you better answer."
Click to expand...
 
macy5189 said:
I think the most recent ACGME accreditation cycles speak for themselves:
BIDMC - 5 years
MGH - 3 years
BWH - 2 years

For those who don't know, these numbers are the best way to evaluate the current state of a program. The ACGME's residency review committee visits a program, and depending on what they find, they will reschedule a visit within 2-5 years. If they feel that a program is up to par and that there are no issues to followup on, they will return in 5 years. But if they find issues in a program that need followup, they will schedule another site visit sooner to see if that program has worked on the things that need fixing. As an applicant, I was strongly advised to apply only to programs with 4 or 5 year accreditation cycles. Why go into a program knowing that there are problems with the residency review committee?
Click to expand...

It's probably been three years since your MGH/BWH rejection, time to get over it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Anesthesia vs IM Subspecialties?
Replies
10
Views
2K
<(^_^)>
?
GolDRoger
Cardiology vs. Anesthesia
Replies
35
Views
5K
lotsapain
L
P
Hip # ga vs spinal
2 3
Replies
134
Views
9K
GravelRider
GravelRider
G
UCSF vs USC vs UTSW anesthesiology residencies
Replies
48
Views
9K
DocMcCoy
DocMcCoy
M
1099 vs w2
Replies
17
Views
3K
Nunchuk
Nunchuk
Top