Will Aegd And Gpr Programs Get Very Competitive From Now On?

[simpledoc]

was just wondering what you guys think about the competition for aegd and gpr programs in future, considering that more and more states are planning to follow NY; i mean think about it, NY itself has like 4 schools churning out more than 400 grads every year: so, will the current no. of AEGD/GPR programs suffice for the future grads so that they dont get left out in a possible race to get a licensure?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BDS-DMD]

I think it probably will. Not just AEGD/GPR,but all speciality programs in general.

 

[groundhog]

I wouldn't worry. This one falls into the "if you build it they will come" category. If completion of a dental PGY starts to catch fire as the only means by which states grant licensure, it won't take long for the state politicians to tap into that resource as the solution to providing dental care for the underserved. The big hosptial GPR's might not expand much, but locally dispersed AEGD clinics will be opened up in sufficient numbers to provide PGY slots for all dental school graduates who do not go on to specialize. That is my forcast.

 

[ajmacgregor]

I wouldn't worry. This one falls into the "if you build it they will come" category. If completion of a dental PGY starts to catch fire as the only means by which states grant licensure, it won't take long for the state politicians to tap into that resource as the solution to providing dental care for the underserved. The big hosptial GPR's might not expand much, but locally dispersed AEGD clinics will be opened up in sufficient numbers to provide PGY slots for all dental school graduates who do not go on to specialize. That is my forcast.

I think that this will come to pass in our practicing lifetime - that a minimum 1 year residency will be required for licensure. I also believe that this is a good thing.

 

[12YearOldKid]

I think all new dentists need more training, but don't necessarily agree that formally mandated GPRs are the way to go about it. As the mandated residency becomes the norm, the states are going to start viewing the GPRs merely as medicaid "dumping grounds". The associated hospitals are going to start viewing them as a source of income. There is a serious danger that the quality of education will take a back seat to those goals.

The last thing a new dentist needs is to be stuck plugging amalgams and shucking teeth all day in a state-run medicaid mill because the state won't grant him licensure until they've had their way with him. Not to mention that mandatory GPRs are likely going to suck patients, faculty, and resources away from dental schools - most of which are already seriously lacking in one or more of those areas. The system of associating for a few years after dental school has been working well for many decades; I see no reason to mess with things now. I vote for keeping the optional GPR/AEGD.

 

[ISU_Steve]

I think all new dentists need more training, but don't necessarily agree that formally mandated GPRs are the way to go about it. As the mandated residency becomes the norm, the states are going to start viewing the GPRs merely as medicaid "dumping grounds". The associated hospitals are going to start viewing them as a source of income. There is a serious danger that the quality of education will take a back seat to those goals.

The last thing a new dentist needs is to be stuck plugging amalgams and shucking teeth all day in a state-run medicaid mill because the state won't grant him licensure until they've had their way with him. Not to mention that mandatory GPRs are likely going to suck patients, faculty, and resources away from dental schools - most of which are already seriously lacking in one or more of those areas. The system of associating for a few years after dental school has been working well for many decades; I see no reason to mess with things now. I vote for keeping the optional GPR/AEGD.

Remind me again why I am glad I plan on specializing or trying to get into academics- anything to avoid general practice.

I don't necessarily think the idea of a GPR is a bad idea, I'm all for more education. However I do agree with the Kid that there is a definite problem with where I see things going now that these new mandates are starting to come down the pike. I don't have quite the dire outlook on things (the Medicaid filling factory) that he (she?) does, but I could see it becoming a clearinghouse for the undesirable patients- those laden with infectious disease, those with psychiatric illnesses (schizos, combative cases of autism, etc), and other patients that most private practitioners avoid. Basically the residents would be the bitches of the state, but not in quite the manner 12YearOldKid envisions, relegated to the most simplistic regions of dentistry.

 

[Biogirl361]

just curious, are general dentists allowed to refuse treatment/refer on the grounds of a psychiatric disorder? my guess is no, but does anyone know for sure?

 

[ISU_Steve]

If there is a reasonable risk to your safety (that can't be otherwise controlled and the last time I checked you don't have a five point leather restraint as standard equipment in most dental offices) you can refuse. At least this is what a lawyer friend of mine (he's a malpractice attorney by the way) told me when I was asking similar questions.

I wouldn't want an unstable schizo as my dental patient, especially not one who is non-compliant with his meds (read as: most of them). I've wrestled with enough of them while doing psych transfers as an EMT to know that it's not something I would want to deal with.

But I don't think it's a major issue, since if they can't pay (and how many nutcases do you know that hold down good paying jobs?) most dentists won't treat them on that ground alone. Hence why they wind up as patients at other sources of dental care- if they receive any at all.

 

[Profchaos]

I was reading a dental book called dental crossroad, where it predicts in the future GPR will be available for every grads.