NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Future Health Care Workforce for Older Americans. Retooling for an Aging America: Building the Health Care Workforce. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2008.

Cover of Retooling for an Aging America

Retooling for an Aging America: Building the Health Care Workforce.

Show details

4The Professional Health Care Workforce


The need for health care professionals trained in geriatric principles is escalating, but even though opportunities for geriatric specialization ex ist, few providers choose this career path. The education and training of professionals in the area of geriatrics is hampered by a scarcity of faculty, inadequate and variable academic curricula and clinical experiences, and a lack of opportunities for advanced training. Furthermore, the educa tion and training of geriatric health care professionals is often limited in scope and needs to be expanded both to take into account the diversity of health care needs among older populations and to prepare professionals for the coming new models of care, many of which will require changed or expanded roles. The committee recommends that more be done to en sure that all professionals have competence in geriatric principles. Finally, the recruitment and retention of geriatric professionals are hampered by several factors, including the persistent stereotypes of older populations, the aging of the workforce itself, and significant financial disincentives. The committee recommends that several types of financial incentives be offered to promote the recruitment and retention of clinical and academic geriatric specialists.

In the coming decades demand is expected to increase markedly for all types of health care professionals in all settings of care for the elderly population. This chapter examines issues related to the education, training, recruitment, and retention of health care professionals in the care of older adults. This chapter begins with a brief overview of the supply of and de mand for professionals who care for older patients. The overall pattern here is that older Americans account for a disproportionate share of professional health care services but, in spite of this demand, the number of geriatric specialists remains low. Next the chapter focuses on a few individual professions essential to the care of older adults. It goes on to examine overarching themes in geriatric education and training. While improvements in the education and training of the health care workforce in geriatrics are evident, these efforts have failed to ensure that all providers who treat older adults have the necessary knowledge and skills to provide competent care. The chapter then considers future trends in education and training. Not only will there be a need for many more professionals working with older adults, but health care workers of the future will need to take on new and expanded roles. As discussed in Chapter 3, these changing responsibilities will affect the entire workforce, including the direct-care workforce, informal caregivers, and patients themselves. (These populations are examined in more detail in Chapters 5 and 6.) Finally, the chapter concludes with strategies for recruiting and retaining professionals in geriatric specialties. These strategies largely depend on overcoming financial disincentives, such as relatively low salaries and the high cost of training.


The number of professional workers directly involved in the care of older adults is difficult to quantify, for a number of reasons: changes in employment status, differing measures (e.g., licensed vs. active professionals), and the presence of ill-defined and overlapping titles for many occupations. Furthermore, many professionals treat older patients without being identified as geriatric providers either by title or certification. Health care-related careers, including medical assistants, physician assistants, physical therapists, mental health counselors, pharmacy technicians, and dental hygienists, account for about half of the country’s 30 fastest-growing occupations (BLS, 2007a). Despite the rapid growth, however, the supply of health care workers does not satisfy current demands and will certainly fall short of the increased demands expected in the future. In fact, the United States will need an additional 3.5 million health care providers by 2030 just to maintain the current ratio of health care workers to population (Table 4-1).

TABLE 4-1. Number of Providers in 2005 and Projected Number Needed in 2030 to Maintain Current Provider-to-Population Ratios (in Thousands).


Number of Providers in 2005 and Projected Number Needed in 2030 to Maintain Current Provider-to-Population Ratios (in Thousands).

While the general need for professionals who care for older patients is high, the particular need for geriatric specialists is even greater. For example, geriatricians1 are the physicians who are specially trained in care of the elderly population as a subspecialty of internal or family medicine. These specialists account for only a very small portion of the total physician workforce—just 7,128 physicians are certified geriatricians, or one geriatrician for every 2,546 older Americans (ADGAP, 2007b). By 2030, assuming current rates of growth and attrition, one estimate shows that this number will increase to only 7,750 (one for every 4,254 older Americans), far short of the total predicted need of 36,000 (ADGAP, 2007b; Alliance for Aging Research, 2002). In fact, some argue that there could be a net decrease in geriatricians because of the decreasing number of physicians entering training programs as well as the decreasing number of geriatricians who choose to recertify (Gawande, 2007). Geriatric psychiatry faces a similar shortage. Only 1,596 physicians are currently certified in geriatric psychiatry, or one for every 11,372 older Americans, and by 2030 that total is predicted to rise to only 1,659, which would then be only one for every 20,195 older Americans (ADGAP, 2007b).

Other professions have similarly low numbers of geriatric specialists. For example, just 4 percent of social workers and less than 1 percent of physician assistants identify themselves as specializing in geriatrics (AAPA, 2007; Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2006). Less than 1 percent of registered nurses (Kovner et al., 2002) and pharmacists2 are certified in geriatrics. In short, dramatic increases in the number of geriatric specialists are needed in all health professions. Even with tremendous effort, it is unlikely that we can completely fulfill the projected needs, but, still, much can be done to begin to close the gaps.

Aside from concerns about the total numbers of health care workers with geriatric competencies, the composition and distribution of the health care workforce for older Americans should also be considered. This includes racial and ethnic diversity as well as the geographic distribution of professionals trained to provide care to older adults.

Racial and Ethnic Diversity

The committee commissioned a paper on the increasing diversity of older populations (Yeo, 2007) and found that the diversity of the workforce is important for several reasons. First, minority patients often prefer to be treated by health care professionals of the same ethnic background (Acosta and Olsen, 2006; IOM, 2004; Mitchell and Lassiter, 2006; Tarn et al., 2005). Second, a provider from a patient’s own background may have better understanding of culturally appropriate demonstrations of respect for older populations and may also be more likely to speak the same language (in the case of bilingual providers). Finally, providers from minority populations often account for most of the services provided to underserved populations (HRSA, 2006a). For example, while only 3.4 percent of dentists are black, they treat almost two-thirds (62 percent) of black patients (Mitchell and Lassiter, 2006).

While older adults are more diverse than ever before, the younger generations training to care for them are even more diverse (see Chapter 2). The pattern of this diversity, however, will not necessarily match up with the pattern of diversity among older Americans. Table 4-2 demonstrates, for example, that there is significant diversity among resident physicians in geriatrics, but the percentage of white residents (39 percent) is much lower than the percentage of whites in the elderly population, and the percentage of Asian residents (42 percent) is much higher that the percentage of Asians in the elderly population.

TABLE 4-2. Race and Ethnic Origin of Residents in Geriatric Medicine and Psychiatry, 2006.


Race and Ethnic Origin of Residents in Geriatric Medicine and Psychiatry, 2006.

Geographic Distribution

The distribution of both professionals and older adults varies widely across the country. Since both of these populations may be unevenly distributed across regions, states, and local communities, different areas may have different workforce needs. The committee commissioned a paper on state profiles of the U.S. health care workforce (Mather, 2007). This report showed there is an average of 443 dentists per 100,000 population aged 65 and older in the United States, but this ratio varies widely among the states. There are 759 dentists per 100,000 older adults in New Hampshire, but only 104 dentists per 100,000 older adults in Kansas. This variance must be caused by a variety of factors, since these states do not have similar distributions in the numbers of other types of professionals. New Hampshire has a lower-than-average number of pharmacists per population of older adults, for example, while Kansas has a higher-than-average number of registered nurses. The need for health care workers with geriatric skills can also vary according to the distribution of older adults. For example, as discussed in Chapter 2, older adults make up 16.8 percent of Florida’s total population, while they account for only 6.8 percent of Alaska’s population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). Differences by community are likely to also vary widely. Therefore, the needed distribution of the health care workforce for older American can vary by both the state and the individual profession.

The recruitment and retention of health care professionals in rural areas is especially challenging (IOM, 2005), and this is an important factor when discussing the health care needs of the geriatric population, since older adults are disproportionately over-represented in rural areas (Hawes et al., 2005). Older adults that live in rural areas tend to be less healthy than those in urban areas and to have a higher rate of difficulty with activities of daily living (ADLs) (Brand, 2007; Magilvy and Congdon, 2000), while their access to health services is limited by the relatively small number of providers (especially specialists) that choose to work in rural areas. Because of the relatively small number of specialists, physician assistants and nurse practitioners play significant roles in providing health services to the rural aging population (Henry and Hooker, 2007). Among the challenges in recruiting any type of professional to rural areas are professional isolation, heavy call schedules, and few job opportunities for the spouses of the health care professionals. The best strategies for recruitment and retention may be those that focus on the training of existing rural providers in geriatric skills via distance education in conjunction with the use of remote technologies to increase the availability of outside geriatric experts for rural elderly populations.


For more than 30 years the IOM (IOM, 1978, 1993) and others (LaMascus et al., 2005; Olson et al., 2003) have called for improvements in the geriatric education and training of virtually all types of health care providers. While progress is evident, many formal training programs still do not include robust coursework in geriatrics (Berman et al., 2005; Eleazer et al., 2005; Linnebur et al., 2005; Scharlach et al., 2000). Among the barriers to increased education and training in geriatrics for all professions are the lack of faculty, lack of funding, lack of time in already-busy curricula, and the lack of recognition of the importance of geriatric training (Bragg et al., 2006; Hash et al., 2007; Hazzard, 2003; Rubin et al., 2003; Simon et al., 2003; Thomas et al., 2003; Warshaw et al., 2006). Furthermore, very little is known about the best methods to improve the knowledge and skills of professionals in caring for older adults (Gill, 2005).

It is not possible to discuss every profession in detail, as virtually every professional cares for older patients to some degree. In the following section, several professions instrumental to the care of older adults are examined. (See Table 4-3 for an overview.) Specifically, the status of geriatric education and training within each profession is discussed. While some professions are discussed more extensively than others, the committee does not intend for this to imply any conclusion about their importance to the care of older adults. Rather, this is a reflection of the amount of data available and the extensiveness of the existing education and training programs in geriatrics. Overall, the breadth and depth of geriatric education and training remains inadequate to prepare all professionals for the health care needs of the future elderly population.


Older Americans account for a disproportionate share of physician services, but a 2002 survey of primary care physicians showed that only half of these physicians believed that their colleagues could adequately treat geriatric conditions (Moore et al., 2004). This section examines the education and training of all physicians in the care of older adults, with a focus on the path for geriatricians.

Geriatric Content

The geriatric curricula in medical schools has had notable improvements. The percent of medical schools with requirements for “geriatric exposure” has increased from 82 percent in 1985-1986 to 98 percent in 1996-1997 (Eleazer et al., 2005). Still, much of this exposure is inadequate or occurs too late in the educational process to influence which specialities the students select. As noted above, several major public and private initiatives support improvement in the geriatric education of physicians. In May 2001 the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation awarded $19.8 million in grants to 10 institutions in order to develop comprehensive training programs in geriatrics (Donald W. Reynolds Foundation, 2007). Because of the success of this effort, the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation repeated the grants in 2003 and 2005, distributing almost $20 million in each round, and in October 2007 the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation issued a request for proposals for a fourth series of grants. In addition to this effort, the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation has established two departments of geriatric medicine.

The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) distributes grants to support Geriatric Education Centers (GECs), which educate and train individuals in the care of older patients. These centers are often collaborative efforts among several health-profession schools or health care facilities and have a special focus on interdisciplinary training.

In July 2007 the John A. Hartford Foundation and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) hosted the National Consensus Conference on Geriatric Education. There the participants developed a set of minimum standards for the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of graduating medical students with respect to the care of older patients (Leipzig, 2007). The standards covered a number of domains, including

  • cognitive and behavioral disorders;
  • medication management;
  • self-care capacity;
  • falls, balance, gait disorders;
  • atypical presentation of disease;
  • palliative care;
  • hospital care for older adults; and
  • health care planning and promotion.
TABLE 4-3. Overview of the Education and Training of Professionals in Geriatrics.


Overview of the Education and Training of Professionals in Geriatrics.

The group then developed a total of 36 competencies based on these domains (AAMC/The John A. Hartford Foundation, 2007). The competencies included

  • identification of medications to be avoided or used with caution in older adults;
  • ability to define and distinguish delirium, depression, and dementia;
  • assessment of ADLs and IADLs;
  • identification of physiological changes due to aging;
  • identification of psychological, social, and spiritual needs of patients; and
  • performance of examination to assess skin pressure ulcer status.

While the coverage of geriatric issues at medical schools is increasing, students still express significant reservations about their abilities to treat older patients. The AAMC’s 2002 Medical School Graduate Questionnaire found 55 percent of graduates perceived inadequate coverage of geriatric issues in medical school; only 68 percent felt adequately prepared to care for older persons in acute-care settings, and only half felt prepared to care for them in long-term care settings (Eleazer et al., 2005). In spite of this, less than 3 percent of medical students take geriatric electives (Moore et al., 2004).

Advanced Training

Postdoctoral training of physicians occurs during both residency and fellowship programs. As of 2003, 27 types of medical residency programs (accounting for 70 percent of trainees) included Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements for some form of geriatrics training, but the extent of such training is highly variable (Bragg and Warshaw, 2005; Bragg et al., 2006; Simon et al., 2003). One survey showed that only about half of graduating family-practice and internal-medicine residents (48 percent and 52 percent, respectively) felt very prepared to care for elderly patients (Blumenthal et al., 2001). Although a large majority of graduating psychiatry residents felt very prepared to diagnose and treat delirium (71 percent) and major depression (96 percent), only 56 percent felt very prepared to diagnose and treat dementia.

Several specialties that treat large numbers of older patients, including ophthalmology, general surgery, and dermatology, do not include any requirements for geriatric training (Bragg and Warshaw, 2005). Since 1994 the John A. Hartford Foundation has funded the Geriatrics-for-Specialists Initiative, which aims to improve geriatric knowledge of surgical specialists and related medical specialists. Their Geriatrics Education for Specialty Residents Program encourages interaction between directors of specialty residencies and the geriatricians within their facilities.

After completion of a residency in internal medicine, family medicine, or general psychiatry, a physician can pursue a fellowship in geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry, which may last one or more years. Fellows may be graduates of allopathic or osteopathic schools of medicine, or they may be international medical graduates (IMGs). This finding is notable in that IMGs have become increasingly relied upon to provide primary care services and care to underserved populations in the United States (Hart et al., 2007).

About half of geriatric-medicine and geriatric-psychiatry fellows (58.2 percent and 44.4 percent, respectively) are female, and about two-thirds of the two types of fellows (64.1 percent and 61.1 percent, respectively) are IMGs (Brotherton and Etzel, 2007). By comparison, across all specialties IMGs make up only 26.9 percent of the entire resident-physician population. As seen in Figures 4-1 and 4-2, while the number of positions available in geriatric-medicine and geriatric-psychiatry fellowship programs has been increasing, the percentage of positions filled has been decreasing. Very few fellows continue past the first year, possibly because of the decrease in the requirement for the length of training that is needed to pursue certification (discussed later in this section).

FIGURE 4-1. First-year geriatric medicine fellowship positions, available and filled.


First-year geriatric medicine fellowship positions, available and filled. SOURCE: ADGAP, 2007b.

FIGURE 4-2. First-year geriatric psychiatry fellowship positions, available and filled.


First-year geriatric psychiatry fellowship positions, available and filled. SOURCE: ADGAP, 2007b.

The Veterans Administration (VA) plays an important role in the development of geriatric fellowships. In the 1970s, in anticipation of the wave of aging World War II veterans, the VA established Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Care Centers (GRECCs) to improve geriatric knowledge (Goodwin and Morley, 1994; Warshaw and Bragg, 2003). These centers are still in operation and often educate and train multiple disciplines in geriatric care. At around the same time the VA first established fellowship programs in geriatric medicine and geriatric psychiatry, often in conjunction with a GRECC. Today, about 25 percent of geriatric-medicine fellowship positions and almost 50 percent of geriatric-psychiatry fellowship positions are supported by the VA, and many other geriatric fellows will receive part of their training in VA facilities (VA, 2007a). The VA also funds four fellowships in geriatric neurology (VA, 2007b).

Other branches of the federal government also support the geriatric education and training of physicians. HRSA administers the Title VII Geriatrics Health Professions Program. Although funding was eliminated for fiscal year 2006, it was restored for fiscal year 2007, with $31.5 million for the support of 48 GECs, 88 Geriatric Academic Career Awards (GACAs) for individuals, and 11 Geriatric Training for Physicians, Dentists, and Behavioral/Mental Health Professions Program awards given to institutions to prepare faculty for these professions (ADGAP, 2007c). In 2007 Congress approved a fiscal year 2008 Labor-Education-HHS appropriations bill3 that included continuation of the Title VII geriatrics programs at the same funding level as for fiscal year 2007, but President Bush vetoed the bill on November 13, 2007, and the House of Representatives failed to override the veto on November 15, 2007.

Finally, CMS is the major financial supporter of the residency training of all physicians. In fiscal year 2004 it paid $7.9 billion for graduate medical education (GME) (GAO, 2006). Medicare pays for a portion of the cost of GME for physician residents and fellows through direct and indirect medical-education payments. Direct medical education (DME) payments support hospitals’ direct cost of operating a GME program, especially salary support for residents; indirect medical education (IME) payments cover a portion of the added patient care costs associated with teaching hospital settings (MedPAC, 2003). Through GME, Medicare has specifically supported advanced training in geriatrics by counting geriatric fellows as full-time equivalent (FTE) residents, while all other subspecialty fellows count only as one-half of a full-time equivalent. Thus hospitals that train geriatricians receive more GME funding than hospitals that train other types of subspecialists (MedPAC, 2003). Furthermore, when GME updates were frozen in the 1990s, geriatric programs were exempt.

Sites of Training

The training of medical students and residents tends to occur in discrete episodes of care, within single disciplines, and usually only in the hospital or ambulatory setting, which means that residents generally do not have the opportunity to follow patients longitudinally over time and across settings of care. Thus many students and residents lack exposure to alternative sites of care of importance to the geriatric patient—namely, home-care settings, nursing homes, and assisted-living facilities. Deterrents to increasing student clinical experiences in these sites include the need for an on-site supervisor of the same discipline, the need for collaboration with site staff, a lack of student interest, and a lack of time in already crowded programs (Leipzig et al., 2002; Warshaw et al., 2006).

In one national survey, only 27 percent of graduating family-practice residents and only 13 percent of graduating internal-medicine residents felt very prepared to care for nursing-home patients (Blumenthal et al., 2001). Still, clinical experiences in alternative sites of care have increased somewhat from past years (Cheeti and Schor, 2002; Matter et al., 2003). For example, Weill Cornell Medical College implemented a clerkship in which third- and fourth-year medical students accompanied a geriatrics team on home visits to patients living with chronic illness; when interviewed about the experience, 84 percent of recent graduates felt that it had had a positive effect on their delivery of care (Yuen et al., 2006).

Among the obstacles to expanding training sites is a lack of funding to cover the expenses of residents while in non-hospital settings. As described above, Medicare distributes GME funds, primarily to hospitals, to support the training of residents. However, the Balanced Budget Amendment of 1997 allows for other providers, including federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics, and managed care organizations to receive GME funds directly (AAMC, 2007c). Furthermore, since 1987 hospitals have been allowed to count the time that residents spend in settings outside the hospital, such as nursing homes and physician offices, subject to certain agreed-upon conditions between the hospital and the outside entity. Still, this does not happen often enough. Since most care of older patients occurs in non-hospital settings, more needs to be done to ensure that professionals are fully trained in how to care for patients in these settings.

The committee concluded that comprehensive care of older patients should include training in non-hospital settings.

Recommendation 4-1: The committee recommends that hospitals should encourage the training of residents in all settings where older adults receive care, including nursing homes, assisted-living facilities, and patients’ homes.

Residency program directors need to ensure that their residents’ schedules include adequate time rotating through these alternative settings, and the directors and hospital administrators need to be willing to collaborate with the outside entities to reach mutually agreeable conditions for partnership.

Board Certification

Physicians may pursue voluntary national board certification in many major specialties and then become certified in the subspecialties of geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry. It was in 1988 that the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) first offered a 10-year certificate of added qualifications (CAQ) in the subspecialty of geriatric medicine.4 Originally CAQs were available only to physicians with at least 2 years of specialty geriatric training or to those who had substantial clinical experience (the “practice pathway”). In 1994 the ABIM and ABFM phased out the practice-pathway option, and in 1998 they lowered the training requirement to only 1 year, resulting in a slight upward trend in the recruitment of geriatric fellows. As seen in Figure 4-3, the number of physicians certified annually surged and then sharply decreased when the practice-pathway option was eliminated; only 13.4 percent of all new certifications occurred after the practice-pathway option ended.

FIGURE 4-3. Numbers of physicians newly certified in geriatric medicine, 1988-2004.


Numbers of physicians newly certified in geriatric medicine, 1988-2004. SOURCE: ADGAP, 2005.

Osteopathic physicians may pursue CAQs from the ABIM or ABFM and also from the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians (AOBFP) or the American Osteopathic Board of Internal Medicine (AOBIM), which have offered certification since 1991. The AOBIM ended the practice-pathway option in 1994, and the AOBFP ended it in 2002.

The American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) recognized geriatric psychiatry as a subspecialty in 1989 and first awarded 10-year CAQs in 1991 (ABPN, 2007a). In 1996 the ABPN phased out the practice-pathway option and subsequently reduced post-graduate training requirements from 2 years to 1 year. Figure 4-4 shows a similar surge and then a drop in certification related to these events.5 Only 13 percent of all geriatric psychiatrists ever certified became certified after the practice pathway was phased out.

FIGURE 4-4. Numbers of physicians newly certified in geriatric psychiatry, 1991-2004.


Numbers of physicians newly certified in geriatric psychiatry, 1991-2004. SOURCE: ADGAP, 2005.

As the geriatric certifications expire, many physicians do not pursue recertification; most of these physicians were certified via the practice pathway. Reasons for not recertifying are multifactorial, including retirement, the burden of the process, and the lack of perceived benefit. Table 4-4 shows that only about half of all physicians certified in geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry before 1994 have been recertified (ADGAP, 2005). By comparison, 89 percent of physicians who received specialty certificates in other disciplines6 from the ABIM between 1990 and 1995 enrolled in the maintenance of certification process; of those, 81 percent completed the process (ABIM, 2005). The comparable rate of recertification in geriatrics among other health professions is unknown.

TABLE 4-4. Number of Physicians Certified and Recertified in Geriatrics.


Number of Physicians Certified and Recertified in Geriatrics.


Professional nurses7 represent the largest sector of the health care workforce responsible for patient care in most health care settings. The professional nurse workforce consists of registered nurses (RNs) and advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), who are RNs prepared in master’s degree programs. With few exceptions, almost all professional nurses are involved in the care of older adults. In addition to direct care, professional nurses supervise licensed practical nurses (LPNs)8 and certified nurse aides (CNAs) (discussed in Chapter 5). While the current and impending nursing shortage has received much attention, there have been some improvements; enrollment in baccalaureate programs increased by 5 percent from 2005 to 2006, and the number of graduates increased by 18 percent (AACN, 2006). However, this upswing is tempered by the fact that more than 32,000 qualified applicants to nursing programs (baccalaureate level or higher) were not accepted; about half the schools identified lack of faculty as the main barrier to admitting more students (AACN, 2006; Anderson, 2007). Additionally, men remain underrepresented in the nursing profession and need to be considered for recruitment efforts to allay workforce shortages (see Chapter 5).

Licensed Practical Nurses

LPNs have a more limited scope of practice than RNs, but this scope can vary widely among states, especially in light of the nursing shortage. With about 26 percent of all LPNs working in nursing homes, LPNs are especially important to the care of older adults in long-term care settings (BLS, 2007b). LPNs often provide more hours of care per nursing home resident per day than do RNs (Harrington et al., 2006). LPNs receive about 1 year of training through technical or vocational schools or through junior or community colleges. With experience and training, LPNs may supervise nurse aides. For example, the Institute for the Future of Aging Services is developing a leadership training program to teach LVNs the necessary skills and competencies to be more effective supervisors (IFAS, 2008). Some of the elements of this training include communication, critical thinking, conflict resolution, and cultural competency. Little is known about the geriatric training of LPNs.

Registered Nurses

As with other professions, nurses generally receive little or no preparation in the principles that underlie geriatric nursing in their basic nursing education. In 2005, 31 percent of new RNs received baccalaureate degrees, but only one-third of the baccalaureate programs required a course focused on geriatrics. Almost all baccalaureate programs include some geriatric content, but the extent of this content is unknown (Berman et al., 2005). While 42 percent of RNs receive their initial education through associate degree nursing programs (HRSA, 2006b), the degree of integration of geriatrics into these programs is also unknown. Given the paucity of geriatric content in programs preparing nurses, it is appropriate to assume that most practicing RNs have little formal preparation in geriatrics.

There exist a number of efforts aimed at ensuring nursing competency in geriatric care. In 2000, for example, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) developed guidelines for geriatric competencies in baccalaureate programs. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) mapped those guidelines against the National Council Licensure Examination (NCLEX), which is required for licensure of all nurses, to ensure adequate testing on geriatric issues (Wendt, 2003). Still, more needs to be done to analyze the depth of this content (Bednash et al., 2003).

As with other professions, there exist various public and private efforts aimed at increasing the geriatric content of nursing programs and developing geriatric nursing leaders. Since 1996 the John A. Hartford Foundation has invested $60 million in the Hartford Geriatric Nursing Initiative, which includes the Institute for Geriatric Nursing and the Centers of Geriatric Nursing Excellence. These programs foster the development of academic leaders and increase geriatric content in the education and training of nurses. In 2002 the Atlantic Philanthropies funded a 5-year initiative to improve nursing competence in treating older adults (Box 4-1). Under the Nurse Reinvestment Act,9 the Comprehensive Geriatric Education Program provides funds for clinical training of nurses in geriatrics, the development and dissemination of geriatric nursing curricula, and the preparation of nursing faculty to teach geriatrics. Funding for this program has remained at around $3.4 million annually since fiscal year 2004 (HRSA, 2007b). The Nurse Education, Expansion, and Development Act of 200710 proposes to offer grants to nursing schools to increase the integration of geriatrics into their core curricula.

Box Icon

BOX 4-1

Nurse Competence in Aging Initiative. “Nurse Competence in Aging (NCA) is an initiative to improve the quality of health care older adults receive by enhancing the geriatric competence—the knowledge, skills and attitudes—of the (more...)

Similar initiatives have also been developed to support education and training in geropsychiatric nursing. For example, in 2007 the John A. Hartford Foundation awarded $1.2 million to establish the Geropsychiatric Nursing Collaborative. This group will establish a core set of geropsychiatric competencies in order to develop basic curricula for all levels of nurse training (The John A. Hartford Foundation, 2007).

Advanced Practice Registered Nurses

An RN may become an APRN by obtaining a master’s degree and may become certified either through a national certifying examination or through state certification mechanisms. An APRN functions as an independent health care provider, addressing the full range of a patient’s health problems and needs within an area of specialization. There are a number of different types of APRNs, including: nurse practitioners (NPs), who provide primary care; clinical nurse specialists, who typically specialize in a medical or surgical specialty; certified nurse anesthetists; and certified nurse midwives. The pipeline for producing APRNs with a specialization in geriatrics is inadequate to meet the need. As with other types of nurses, the John A. Hartford Foundation has been a key supporter in the development of the geriatric APRN workforce. In particular, the Building Academic Geriatric Nursing Capacity Scholars and Fellows Awards Program targets doctoral and post-doctoral nurses and APRNs who want to redirect their careers toward geriatrics (Fagin et al., 2006).

NPs represent a particularly important component of the workforce caring for older adults because of their ability to provide primary care as well as care for patients prior to, during, and following an acute care hospitalization and also to care for residents in institutional long-term care settings. NPs treat a disproportionate number of older adults—23 percent of office visits and 47 percent of hospital outpatient visits with NPs are made by people 65 and older (Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2005). Furthermore, NPs care for a higher proportion of elderly poor adults than do physicians or physician assistants (Cipher et al., 2006). Finally, NPs have been shown to provide high-quality care and be cost-effective (Hooker et al., 2005; Melin and Bygren, 1992; Mezey et al., 2005).

While APRNs care for large numbers of older adults in ambulatory care, hospitals, and institutional long-term care settings, APRN education programs lack specific geriatric requirements. The AACN publishes a set of competencies called Nurse Practitioner and Clinical Nurse Specialist Competencies for Older Adult Care (AACN, 2004), but it does not require that these competencies be incorporated into educational programs. Some of these competencies include

  • ability to distinguish between illness and normal aging;
  • assessment of geriatric syndromes;
  • identification of changes in mental status;
  • education of patients and their families about prevention and end-of-life care;
  • assessment of cultural and spiritual concerns; and
  • collaboration with other health care professionals.

Little is known about on-the-job opportunities for APRNs to gain knowledge and skill in geriatric nursing care.

Oral-Health Care Workers

The oral health needs of older adults are significantly different from the needs of younger people, and older adults face a variety of challenges in meeting these needs. One of the barriers facing older adults who need oral-health services is lack of access to care. This lack of access is often due to the lack of coverage under Medicare for routine services, but it is also the case that many oral-health professionals are reluctant to travel to alternative sites of care (such as community-based settings) or to manage the complicated social and medical challenges associated with older patients. Even though the delivery of basic oral-health services to nursing home patients is supported by government regulation, less than 20 percent of residents of government-certified institutions received dental services in 1997 (MacEntee et al., 2005). In 1987 the National Institute on Aging (NIA) predicted a need for 1,500 geriatric dental academicians and 7,500 dental practitioners with training in geriatric dentistry by the year 2000 (NIA, 1987). By the mid-1990s, however, only about 100 dentists in total had completed advanced training in geriatrics (HRSA, 1995), and little has changed since then.

The availability of geriatric training for dentists has improved over the past few decades. In 1976, only 5 percent of dental schools offered courses in geriatric dentistry and, at that time, more than half of the programs (52 percent) did not foresee geriatric dentistry as part of their future curricula (Mohammad et al., 2003). However, by 1981 about half of all schools had developed geriatric dentistry programs, and an additional 25 percent planned to add geriatric curricula in the near future. As of 2001, all dental schools reported having some curricula related to geriatric dentistry, and almost one-third operated a geriatric clinic (Mohammad et al., 2003). The geriatric content varies greatly among schools. A school may offer only a single elective course, for example, or material information may be imparted via guest lecturers. Additionally, exposure to clinical experiences is lagging behind the didactic requirements. Of the students graduating in 2001, almost 20 percent did not feel prepared to care for the elderly population, and 25 percent felt the geriatric dental curriculum was inadequate (Mohammad et al., 2003).

The American Dental Association currently does not recognize geriatric dentistry as a separate specialty, and none of the 509 residencies recognized by the American Dental Education Association are specifically devoted to the care of geriatric patients; in contrast, specialty recognition and 71 residencies exist for pediatric dentistry. In fiscal year 2005, HRSA supported seven residency programs in pediatric or general dentistry; one program specifically requested funds to improve clinical and didactic curriculum in geriatric dentistry, but the residency is not focused on geriatrics (HRSA, 2005b). The VA’s Advanced Fellowship in Geriatrics program allows dentists (and other health care professionals) to pursue advanced research in geriatrics at one of 16 GRECCs (VA, 2007a). Previous VA fellowships in geriatric dentistry are no longer available. As mentioned previously, HRSA administers the Title VII Geriatrics Health Professions Program, which includes awards to institutions to prepare geriatrics faculty in dentistry, medicine, and behavioral/mental health.

The American Board of General Dentistry (ABGD) offers board certification in general dentistry following completion of a post-graduate residency; exam content does not explicitly require questions on geriatric care or on special-care dentistry, but it does explicitly require knowledge of pediatric dentistry (ABGD, 2007). Also, while the ABGD’s general dentistry certification process has minimum requirements for continuing dental education in several areas (e.g., periodontics, orthodontics, and pediatric dentistry), it has no minimum requirements for “special patient care,” although it is a listed category. The American Society for Geriatric Dentistry (ASGD), part of the Special Care Dentistry Association, offers fellowship status to ASGD members who meet requirements for post-graduate and continuing education and who pass an oral examination. The American Board of Special Care Dentistry further offers diplomate status to ASGD fellows based on time in practice and membership in the SCDA. The American Dental Association, however, does not recognize this specialty board.

Less is known about the geriatric education and training of dental hygienists, although dental hygienists are increasingly important in providing care to special populations, especially those in rural areas and long-term care settings. Dental hygienists usually earn associate degrees, but some programs grant up to a master’s level degree. Dental hygienists are licensed by individual states, must pass written and clinical examinations, and have variable requirements for continuing education. While all schools have in tegrated geriatric content, about half (49.5 percent) consider their geriatric curricula to be inadequate (Tilliss et al., 1998).


There is currently a significant national shortage of pharmacists in the United States, which is due to a number of factors, including increased use of prescription medications, increased workloads, changing sites of service, demographic changes in the workforce, and expanding scopes of work (HRSA, 2000). While the absolute number of pharmacists has grown, supply has not kept up with demand, and wide variations in the numbers of pharmacists per capita exist from state to state (Walton et al., 2007). The current shortage causes problems for older adults, who tend to be heavy users of prescription drugs and to rely on pharmacists for counseling on the proper use of medications and on the monitoring of medication-related problems, such as interactions, duplications, adverse events, and adherence irregularities (Cooksey et al., 2002).

The role of pharmacists in the interdisciplinary care of older patients was reinforced in 1974 when Medicare first mandated drug regimen reviews (now called a Medication Regimen Review) in nursing homes by consultant pharmacists (Levenson and Saffel, 2007). In this setting, the role of the consultant pharmacist includes the provision information and recommendations to physicians regarding medications, identification of improper use of medications or the prescription of incompatible medications, and collaboration with the medical director and other staff to develop proper protocols for response to adverse events. This role has increased importance with the escalation of the number of medications given to the most frail and chronically ill patients. Additionally, with the advent of Medicare Part D, pharmacists potentially have a role in the education of older adults on their plan options and associated implications.

The doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) degree requires 4 years of pharmacy education. The Accreditation Standards and Guidelines for the Professional Program in Pharmacy Leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy Degree, adopted in 2006, implies that geriatrics should be a part of the pharmacy curriculum but does not explicitly require its inclusion. However, the science foundation of programs must consider populations that have altered pharmacological needs because of physiology or other reasons; this may include geriatric patients. Some of the competencies needed for the care of older patients include knowledge of the influence of aging on drug therapy, provision of medication and wellness counseling, and knowledge of geriatric syndromes (Odegard et al., 2007).

The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) accredits 1-year residencies in pharmacy, community pharmacy, or managed care pharmacy, which are referred to as PGY-1, for Post Graduate Year 1. Pharmacists may pursue a second year of residency training (PGY-2) in a focused area, including geriatric pharmacy. The ASHP currently accredits (or pre-accredits) 351 PGY-2 programs (ASHP, 2007). There are eight accredited programs in geriatric pharmacy, and two other programs are pre-candidates for accreditation. The American College of Clinical Pharmacy offers one fellowship position in geriatrics to prepare pharmacists for academia and independent research; this 2-year fellowship focuses on Alzheimer’s Disease (ACCP, 2007). Viability of these programs has been hindered by inconsistent funding; with the exception of GECs, there are few federal or private-foundation-funded programs or initiatives that support pharmacist education and research training in geriatrics.

Pharmacist licensure, which is performed by individual states and jurisdictions, depends on passing a national examination, and 46 jurisdictions require an additional examination on federal law and state-specific regulations (CCP, 2006). Some states also require laboratory and oral examinations. Re-licensure requires a minimum of continuing education credits. Currently, neither continuing education in geriatrics nor demonstrated geriatric competency is required for pharmacist re-licensure in any state. However, a 2005 survey of state pharmacy laws found that one state requires all pharmacists to participate in 2 hours of continuing education in end-of-life care every 2 years, and two states require all pharmacists working as long-term care consultants to have at least a portion of their continuing education activities focused on the care of older adults (Linnebur et al., 2005).

Physician Assistants

Physician assistants (PAs) represent an important part of the workforce for the elderly population (Olshansky et al., 2005). PAs work under the supervision of a physician, but they can often work apart from the physician’s direct presence and can prescribe medications and bill for health care services. Unlike some of the other professions described above, the PA workforce tends to be younger and is growing rapidly. About half of PAs work in family medicine or general medicine (Brugna et al., 2007; Hooker and Berlin, 2002). The 65-and-older population accounts for about 32 percent of office visits to PAs (Hachmuth and Hootman, 2001), and 78 percent of PAs report treating at least some patients over the age of 85 (Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2005).

PAs are an especially important source of care in underserved areas, where they often act as the principal care provider in clinics, with physicians attending on an intermittent basis. In this vein, they are a potential source of care to meet the increased need that is projected for long-term care settings. Their use may be a particularly attractive strategy since, as with NPs, the use of PAs has been shown to be cost-effective (Ackermann and Kemle, 1998; Brugna et al., 2007). On the other hand, according to a survey of more than 23,000 PAs, only 5 percent of respondents reported spending any time in a nursing home or other long-term care facility, and less than 1 percent identified their primary practice as geriatrics (AAPA, 2007). Of those respondents who specialize in geriatrics, 67 percent reported working primarily in a nursing home or long-term care facility, and 75 percent reported spending at least some time in those settings. Almost 18 percent of PAs who specialize in geriatrics spend some time caring for patients at home, compared to 1.3 percent of all other types of PAs. And almost 22 percent of PAs specializing in geriatrics are employed by the government, primarily by the VA, while only 9 percent of all other types of PAs work for the government.

The overwhelming majority of the 136 accredited PA programs are located within universities and colleges, but a few exist within hospitals, community colleges, and military institutions (BLS, 2007c). Most of these programs offer a master’s level degree, while others offer bachelor’s and associate-level degrees. Virtually all students in these programs—99 percent—pursue primary-care tracks. Most programs follow traditional curricula of medical schools (Hooker and Berlin, 2002), and while some PAs receive advanced training, the bulk of the advanced programs focus on surgical and emergency care (APPAP, 2008). Accreditation standards require training in geriatrics but do not specify a minimum workload (BLS, 2007c). As is the case with other professions, there have been many calls for increased education and training of PAs in geriatrics (Brugna et al., 2007; Olson et al., 2003; Segal-Gidan, 2002; Woolsey, 2005). Unfortunately, very little has been done to examine the quality and quantity of current geriatric education and training among PA programs. In one survey, PA program administrators who were asked which areas of the curricula needed increased emphasis said that geriatric issues related to pharmacology and mental health deserved the highest priority (Olson et al., 2003).

Social Workers

The need for geriatric social workers has been recognized for decades (NIA, 1987; Saltz, 1997). In 1987 the NIA estimated that there would be a need for 70,000 social workers prepared in geriatrics by 2020, or a 43 percent increase over the needs at that point in time. In spite of this urgency, the number of social workers trained in geriatrics has not kept pace with the need. While 73 percent of social workers report that they work with adults aged 55 and over, and between 7.6 and 9.4 percent of social work ers are employed in long-term care settings, only about 4 percent actually specialize in geriatrics (ASPE, 2006; Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2006). Between 1996 and 2001 the number of students specializing in aging decreased by 15.8 percent (ASPE, 2006). On the other hand, many social workers begin to specialize in the care of older persons after graduation and do so without formal training in geriatrics (Cummings and DeCoster, 2003).

Social workers receive training through either bachelors-level (BSW) or masters-level (MSW) programs, which may be accredited by the Council on Social Work Education. As of 2006, the Council accredited 458 BSW programs and 181 MSW programs; there were also 74 doctoral programs in social work (DSW or PhD) at the time (BLS, 2007d). Combined, BSW and MSW programs graduate about 31,000 students annually (ASPE, 2006). Social workers with BSW degrees are more likely to work in long-term care settings than those with MSW degrees. A 1995 survey showed that 11.5 percent of BSW social workers worked in nursing homes or hospices, compared to 1 percent of MSW holders, and 16.5 percent identified aging services as their primary practice, compared to 3.7 percent of MSW holders (ASPE, 2006).

In spite of the long-recognized need for social workers trained in aging issues, most social work programs contain little or no geriatric content in their curricula. In fact, the proportion of programs offering specialization in aging is decreasing. In the early 1980s almost half of MSW programs offered an aging specialization; by the early 1990s this had dropped to about one-third of programs, and as of 2003 only about 29 percent of MSW programs offered an aging concentration, specialization, or certificate program (Cummings and DeCoster, 2003; Scharlach et al., 2000). Existing aging curricula often have limited content, rarely offering more than one or two elective courses. In 1988 the vast majority of BSW programs—about 80 percent—did not offer specific instruction on aging issues (Lubben et al., 1992). The inadequacy of curricula is compounded by the fact that social-work students show low levels of interest in taking courses on aging and have persistent negative attitudes about working with older people (Hash et al., 2007; Lubben et al., 1992).

In 2000 the Council on Social Work Education, in conjunction with Strengthening Aging and Gerontology Education for Social Work (SAGE-SW), surveyed social workers about the competencies that geriatric social workers and other types of social workers need in order to care for older patients effectively (Rosen et al., 2000). Sixty-five competencies were identified, of which 35 were described by the respondents as being needed by all types of social workers. These competencies included

  • knowledge of the physical, social, and psychological changes of aging;
  • knowledge of the diversity of attitudes about aging;
  • use of case management skills to get access to needed resources;
  • collaboration with other health professionals;
  • identification of one’s own biases toward aging; and
  • respect of diverse cultural and ethnic needs.

Several initiatives aim to promote education and training in geriatric social work:

  • The Social Work Leadership Institute at the New York Academy of Medicine, funded by the Atlantic Philanthropies and the John A. Hartford Foundation, coordinates the Practicum Partnership Program, an innovative educational model to train masters level social workers in their field work (Box 4-2).
  • The Atlantic Philanthropies established the Institute for Geriatric Social Work, which, in partnership with the American Society on Aging and other groups, promotes the training of practicing social workers in issues related to the elderly population (IGSW, 2007).
  • In 2000-2004 the John A. Hartford Foundation supported the Geriatric Enrichment Program (GeroRich) to increase geriatric content in basic social work courses at both the BSW and MSW levels (Hash et al., 2007).
  • The John A. Hartford Foundation also supports the Council on Social Work Education Gero-Ed Center, which serves as a resource for both faculty and students to become competent in geriatric issues.
Box Icon

BOX 4-2

The Practicum Partnership Program. “The Practicum Partnership Program sponsored by the New York Academy of Medicine and the Hartford Foundation is in its eighth year. It has trained more than 1,000 social workers to work with older adults using (more...)

Very few social-work trainees do advanced training or field work in aging, and of those who do, most are students in MSW programs. This lack of training is primarily due to a lack of funding for program support or stipends (ASPE, 2006; Scharlach et al., 2000). In partnership with the Social Work Leadership Institute, the John A. Hartford Foundation supports 60 MSW programs in an effort to increase the quality and content of field experiences in aging. The effort aims to increase the numbers of MSW students who go on to specialize in geriatrics.

In 1998 the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), the voluntary professional organization of social workers, created a new specialty section on aging. Recently the NASW has developed three specialty certifications in gerontology available to its members (NASW, 2007).

Allied Health and Other Professions and Occupations

Many other professionals also provide essential health services to older Americans. These professionals are pressed to meet the needs of the growing older population because of shortages of supply, increases in demand, and deficiencies in geriatric education and training that are similar to those already discussed. For example,

  • HRSA’s 1995 report on the status of geriatric education showed only 17 percent to 19 percent of physical therapy programs had at least 75 percent of their students complete a geriatric internship even though 39 percent of the physical therapy patients were over 65 (HRSA, 1995).
  • The Emergency Medical Technician—Basic: National Standard Curriculum, developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, includes modules dedicated to the care of obstetrics and pediatric patients, but none are dedicated to the older adult patient (NHTSA, 1994).
  • While 84 percent of optometry schools and colleges reported a required geriatrics course, the content of these courses was variable.
  • Only one of the eight schools of podiatric medicine has a discrete course devoted to the care of geriatric patients, while six list courses specific to the care of pediatric patients (AACPM, 2007).
  • In a 2004 survey of dietetics and nutrition programs, 22 percent of the undergraduate programs and 44 percent of the graduate programs offered courses in aging (Rhee et al., 2004). In comparison, maternal and child health courses were offered in 31 and 51 percent of the programs, respectively. Thirty-seven percent of graduate programs had no faculty in geriatrics.
  • None of the following specialties with high volumes of older patients has a subspecialty certificate available in geriatrics: dermatology, emergency medicine, physical medicine and rehabilitation, or surgery. By contrast, all have certification in pediatrics (ABMS, 2007).

Of particular importance are the many occupations that fall under the broad category of “allied health care workers.” This term is ill-defined, and the many definitions that have been developed are often contradictory (Lecca et al., 2003). In general, allied health care workers represent nearly 200 different occupations, including various types of technologists, technicians, therapists, and health-information professionals. Many of the allied health occupations are currently experiencing shortages and are projected to be among the fastest-growing occupations in the United States (BLS, 2007a). These groups face significant increases in need for their services in all care settings (Chapman et al., 2004). The geriatric education and training of the allied health care workforce is highly variable and is usually structured according to the standards of the appropriate accrediting body.

Other Issues in Geriatric Education and Training

In addition to the particular professional concerns discussed in the previous section, there are a number of other overarching issues that all professions face in the geriatric education and training of their practitioners. First, the education and training of all types of professionals depends on the availability of qualified faculty. Second, practitioners should be aware of the unique health care needs of several special elderly populations; these populations include various racial and ethnic groups as well as the growing number of lesbian, gay, and bisexual older adults.11 Third, all practitioners who care for older adults should be educated and trained in the full spectrum of health care needs, from health promotion to palliative care. Finally, as discussed in Chapter 3, interdisciplinary care of older adults shows promise, so students in all professions should be trained on how to be an effective member of an interdisciplinary team.


A well-recognized barrier to geriatric education and training of all health care providers is the inadequate number of available and qualified academic faculty (Berkman et al., 2000; Berman et al., 2005; Cavalieri et al., 1999; Graber et al., 1999; Hazzard, 2003; Kovner et al., 2002; Rhee et al., 2004; Rubin et al., 2003; Simon et al., 2003; Warshaw et al., 2006). Any effort to increase geriatric education will find itself limited by the availability of trained faculty. Furthermore, beyond the need for a greater number of geriatric faculty, all geriatric fields need strong expert leaders to develop new knowledge and recruit new students.

It is a controversial question whether advanced geriatric training programs should be designed to train geriatric specialists for clinical practice or to train them for academic research and leadership. Some argue that, for the sake of the efficient use of scarce resources, geriatric specialists should concentrate on their roles of performing research and training the future health care workforce and should act as clinical consultants in only the most complex cases.

Beyond academics and clinical care, geriatric leaders need to learn the skills to manage staff, promote quality, and create a healthy work environment. For example, the relationship between nursing supervisors and nurse aides plays a significant role in the development of a hospitable work environment that leads to increased job satisfaction (see Chapter 5 for more on job satisfaction and turnover among direct-care workers) (Tellis-Nayak, 2007). In addition, certain management principles, such as providing rewards to nurse aide staff, have been associated with improved patient outcomes (Barry et al., 2005). This relationship will also have increased importance as direct-care workers assume more patient responsibility in the cascading mechanism of job delegation (discussed more later in this chapter).

To increase the number of geriatric leaders, a number of public and private entities have developed programs to promote research and teaching capacities in geriatrics. Examples include the following:

  • The Hartford Geriatric Social Work Faculty Scholars Program, funded by the John A. Hartford Foundation, aims to develop leaders in geriatric social work through research support, mentoring, skills-based workshops, and nurturing of professional relationships (GSWI, 2007; Maramaldi et al., 2004).
  • HRSA’s Geriatric Training for Physicians, Dentists, and Behavioral/ Mental Health Professions Program is the country’s sole source of postgraduate training for preparing dentists to teach geriatrics (HRSA, 2005a). In fiscal year 2005 HRSA funded 13 programs with a total of $6.3 million in grants. It is unknown, however, whether all of these programs filled their available dental positions.
  • The Atlantic Philanthropies and the John A. Hartford Foundation support the Dennis W. Jahnigen Career Development Scholars Awards to develop geriatric academic leaders in surgical and related specialties, such as anesthesiology, ophthalmology, and emergency medicine. The two foundations are also responsible for the establishment and continuation of the T. Frank Williams Research Scholars Award, which supports research by medical subspecialists in geriatrics or aging.
  • In July 2004 the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation awarded a total of $12 million in grants to four academic health centers for them to train their medical faculty in geriatrics (Donald W. Reynolds Foundation, 2007).
  • HRSA grants GACAs (Geriatric Academic Career Awards) directly to junior faculty at allopathic and osteopathic medical schools to support teaching (HRSA, 2005a).
  • The John A. Hartford Foundation’s Centers of Excellence in geriatric medicine, psychiatry, and nursing help to train larger numbers of competent geriatric academicians and also allow specialists to devote time to geriatric research in addition to their work training future clinicians.

Recognizing the scarcity of geriatric leaders, several institutions have developed innovative approaches to spread knowledge of geriatric principles. For example,

  • In 1997 the Practicing Physician Education Project used geriatric experts to train non-geriatrician physician leaders to educate their peers on various geriatric syndromes (Levine et al., 2007).
  • Since 1992, the Nurses Improving Care for Health System Elders (NICHE) program has worked with nurses in hospital settings to implement models and protocols that improve the care of geriatric patients. In the Geriatric Resource Nurse (GRN) model, a geriatric APRN trains a staff nurse to be the clinical resource on geriatric issues for other nurses (NICHE, 2008).
  • The Boston University Medical Center developed the Chief Resident Immersion Training (CRIT) Program in the Care of Older Adults to improve understanding and teaching of geriatric principles among residents in non-geriatric fields (ADGAP, 2007a). The program is being disseminated nationally.
  • In 2003-2004 the Society of General Internal Medicine and the John A. Hartford Foundation worked in Collaborative Centers for Research and Education in the Care of Older Adults to enhance the ability of general internists to teach geriatrics (Williams et al., 2007).
  • HRSA administers the National Advisory Council on Nurse Education and Practice, which, in response to the Nursing Reinvestment Act, provided grants for the geriatric education and training of registered nurses so that they can act as leaders and trainers for CNAs and LPNs (HRSA, 2003).
  • Geriatric experts have tried to infuse geriatrics into training programs for personnel who might not normally gain exposure to geriatric principles. Faculty at Northern Michigan University developed a training program for correctional workers that focused on the needs of the aging prison population (Cianciolo and Zupan, 2004).

Special Populations

Ethnogeriatrics As discussed in Chapter 2, the elderly population of the future will be more diverse than today’s older adults. Thus increased knowledge of different cultural belief systems will be important to the development of comprehensive and effective plans of action. For example, older Asian adults may not disclose their non-Western health beliefs, including the use of herbal medications or alternative health procedures, unless directly asked (McBride et al., 1996). These concerns are especially important considering the potential mismatch between the diversity of the health care workforce and the diversity of the older adult population. For example, the high proportion of IMGs among fellows in geriatric medicine and geriatric psychiatry was demonstrated earlier in this chapter. However, concerns exist for issues of communication and cultural competency in particular when IMGs care for older adults (Howard et al., 2006; Kales et al., 2006).

Several efforts have been started to improve upon the ethnogeriatric education and training of the health care workforce in settings where providers are responsible for taking care of diverse populations. For example, the Collaborative for Ethnogeriatric Education produced a five-module Core Curriculum in Ethnogeriatrics and 11 Ethnic Specific Modules which can be used as resources in different geographic areas to provide content on local populations ( Box 4-3 lists some of the knowledge and skills needed to properly care for diverse populations.

Box Icon

BOX 4-3

Knowledge and Skills Needed in Ethnogeriatrics. Knowledge: Differential health risks

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons Approximately 1 million to 3 million adults ages 65 and older are gay, lesbian, or bisexual (GLB), and by 2030 that number is expected to rise to 4 million (Cahill et al., 2000). The few existing studies on the health care needs of older GLB patients report similarities to the health care needs of heterosexual older adults, with a few important differences. Many GLB patients do not feel comfortable disclosing their sexual orientation to their health care providers. Surveys reveal that discrimination based on sexual orientation is widespread in health care and other social-service settings, and it often causes GLB persons to avoid seeking health care (Cahill et al., 2000; Ryan and Futterman, 1998; Schatz and O’Hanlan, 1994). The discomfort of revealing sexual orientation to health care providers is heightened for older adults who came of age at a time when society was even less accepting of homosexuality (Brotman et al., 2003).

Knowledge of a patient’s sexuality can be critical to high-quality patient care. A recent study estimated that approximately 100,000 adults ages 50 and older are HIV positive (ASA, 2007). Older adults with HIV/AIDS may be misdiagnosed because health care providers do not perceive HIV/AIDS to be a risk among older adults and because older adults often do not disclose the nature of their sexual activity to health care providers (AIDS InfoNet, 2007; NAHOF, 2007). Additionally, GLB older adults often do not have the same family support systems as heterosexual older adults, particularly since GLB older adults are less likely to have children and are more likely to live alone (Cahill et al., 2000).

The Continuum of Care

Geriatric education is highly variable in its level of comprehensiveness, and it often fails to address the health care needs of older adults across the continuum of care, ranging from preventive to palliative care. Health care professionals should be aware that older adults have a vast range of health care needs. Many students still are not taught about or exposed to older populations at either end of the continuum of care.

Health promotion/disease prevention Health promotion is beneficial for people of all ages and all health conditions, but it may be especially important to the growing cohort of healthy older adults—that is, the 20 percent of older Americans who have no chronic disease and who require only preventive and episodic care. Traditionally, the training of professionals in the care of older adults has focused only on the treatment of disease and has given little attention to the promotion of health. For example, poor nutrition is prevalent among seniors (IOM, 2000), but most professionals are still not trained in the nutritional needs of older adults (Bonnel, 2003; Rhee et al., 2004). Government agencies and professional societies have developed guidelines for health promotion and disease prevention in elderly populations which include goals typically promoted for other populations, including increased physical activity, smoking cessation, and weight management (Fields and Nicastri, 2004). These guidelines are based on research that shows the benefits of health promotion and disease prevention in elderly populations. For example, studies have shown that older persons who practice tai chi experience fewer falls (Li et al., 2002, 2005; Wolf et al., 1996).

Screening guidelines are important in nursing homes for the early detection of depression and pressure ulcers (McElhone et al., 2005). Unfortunately, prevention and screening guidelines often lump all elderly persons into one group (65 years and older), and recommendations are often based on studies performed in younger age groups (Nicastri and Fields, 2004). More research is needed on preventive services for older adults, especially for the “oldest old,” and health care professionals need to be aware of the value of these services for all of their older patients.

The activities of professional groups today reflect a growing awareness of the importance of health promotion and disease prevention for older patients. For example, the Geriatrics Section of the American Physical Therapy Association has an interest group on “Health Promotion & Wellness” that aims to improve the education, clinical practice, and research of physical therapists in health and wellness among older adults (APTA, 2007). The American Geriatrics Society lists “health promotion and disease prevention strategies” among the areas of knowledge needed for the successful preparation of internal medicine physicians who care for older adults (AGS, 2004). The American Dietetic Association includes the provision of nutrition care across the lifespan, “infants through geriatrics,” as one of the core competencies for entry-level dietitians and dietetic technicians (ADA, 2008).

Palliative care Within geriatric education and training programs, palliative care skills are especially important since 80 percent of American deaths occur among those over age 65 (Ersek and Ferrell, 2005). Skills that are particularly important include identification and relief of physical and emotional stress, effective communication, interdisciplinary team work, recognition of the signs and symptoms of imminent death, and support of the bereavement process (National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care, 2004). The opportunities for exposure to these topics has improved greatly in recent years; almost all medical schools offer some form of end-of-life care education, and 62 percent of pharmacy schools surveyed reported didactic training in end-of-life care (Billings and Block, 1997; Herndon et al., 2003).

Despite such improvements, however, the overall education and training of the health care workforce in palliative care is deficient (Billings and Block, 1997; Ersek and Ferrell, 2005; Holley et al., 2003; IOM, 1997; Paice et al., 2006; Walsh-Burke and Csikai, 2005). In one survey of medical students, residents, and faculty, less than 20 percent reported that they received formal education in end-of-life care, 39 percent felt unprepared to address patient fears, and almost half felt unprepared to deal with their own feelings about death (Sullivan et al., 2003). Another survey showed that less than half of graduating family medicine and internal medicine residents (41 percent and 43 percent, respectively) felt very prepared to counsel patients on end-of-life issues (Blumenthal et al., 2001). In contrast, a 2005 study showed 70 percent of geriatric medicine fellows reported completing rota tions in palliative care, end-of-life care, or hospice, and only 2.7 percent felt unprepared to care for dying patients (Pan et al., 2005).

In October 2006 the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) announced Hospice and Palliative Medicine as a new subspecialty for ten different specialty boards (ABMS, 2006). The first certifying exams will be administered in October 2008.

Interdisciplinary Team Training

One element common to many models described in Chapter 3 is the use of interdisciplinary teams. The value of interdisciplinary teams for the care of older adults with complex care needs has been increasingly acknowledged in recent years (Dyer et al., 2003; Howe and Sherman, 2006; Inouye et al., 2000; Maurer et al., 2006; Wheeler et al., 2007; Williams et al., 2006). The term “interdisciplinary team” implies an interaction and an interdependence among practitioners with different areas of expertise who are working together to treat a single patient. Still, health care professionals are typically trained separately by discipline, which fosters ideas of hierarchy and responsibility for individual decision making (Hall and Weaver, 2001). As a result, providers may gain little understanding of or appreciation for the expertise of other providers or the skills needed to effectively participate in an interdisciplinary team. However, most health care professions identify interdisciplinary team practice as a necessary competency in the care of older adults.

The field of geriatrics led the movement toward team training in health services. In the 1970s the VA developed the Interdisciplinary Team Training in Geriatrics (ITTG) Program, and in the 1980s HRSA began awarding grants for GECs to teach collaboration and teamwork to health care professionals working in geriatrics (Heinemann and Zeiss, 2002).

In 1997 the John A. Hartford Foundation funded eight national programs to develop geriatric interdisciplinary team training (GITT) programs for students in nursing, social work, and medicine in order to foster the skills needed for effective team care. These programs often included other professionals, such as pharmacists, dentists, and rehabilitation therapists. GITT seeks to train health professionals to work more effectively on geriatric care teams. The announced goals included the creation of a national model to forge partnerships between geriatric care providers and institutions of education, the development of educational curricula for interdisciplinary team training, training health care professionals in team skills, and the testing of new models of training for practicing professionals (Flaherty et al., 2003).

To evaluate this training, several measures have been developed to assess trainees’ knowledge of interdisciplinary geriatric-care planning, their knowledge of team dynamics, their attitudes toward geriatrics and teams, and their skills in team care (Flaherty et al., 2003). One evaluation showed that the most improvement came on measures of attitudes, especially self-reported measures of team skills; no changes were seen in care planning, and few changes were seen in team dynamics, depending on the question and the discipline (Fulmer et al., 2005). Obstacles identified for interdisciplinary training within the GITT programs included differing lengths of rotation among the disciplines, differing levels of experience among the participants, and the inability of clinicians to supervise students from other disciplines (Reuben et al., 2003, 2004). Physicians were the least experienced with and the most averse to sharing responsibilities of patient care. Similar results have been documented in studies of other similar models (Fitzgerald et al., 2006; Leipzig et al., 2002; Williams et al., 2006).

HRSA has been a strong supporter of interdisciplinary training in geriatrics and has stated that interdisciplinary geriatric education should be a core requirement for every health profession (HRSA, 1995). As mentioned above, GECs provide interdisciplinary training of faculty, students, and practitioners in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease, disability, and other health problems of older adults (HRSA, 2007c). While more and more professionals are gaining experience in interdisciplinary training, little evidence exists to determine which methods are best for imparting the knowledge and skills necessary to work as a team member or to show how such training affects patterns of practice (Cooper et al., 2001; Hall and Weaver, 2001; Remington et al., 2006).


The education and training of professionals in geriatrics has improved because of the expansion of school-based opportunities, increased efforts in interdisciplinary training, and the development of alternative pathways to gaining geriatric knowledge and skills (discussed in more detail later in this chapter). Professional groups, private foundations, and public agencies all support and promote multiple efforts.

Even so, the committee concludes that in the education and training of the health care workforce, geriatric principles are still too often insuf ficiently represented in the curricula, and clinical experiences are not robust.

This is true in general for all the relevant professions. Very few professions have robust advanced training programs in geriatrics; of those professionals that do have options for advanced training, few individuals take advantage of these opportunities. One barrier to the development of more opportunities for advanced training in geriatrics is a lack of funding (discussed later in this chapter).

Professionals may also learn about the care of older adults through continuing-education activities. Most licensed professionals have state-based requirements that they must complete a specific number of continuing-education approved hours in order to maintain their licenses. Requirements vary widely among states, both in the number of hours required and regarding the content of those activities. Continuing-education requirements may also depend on requirements for board certification or for membership in professional societies. The content of the continuing education required of professionals is usually not specified. Many professionals fail to receive adequate education and training in geriatric issues while in school, and of those who do receive such education and training, some fail to keep up to date with this knowledge.

Since almost all professionals find themselves caring for older adults to some degree, they need to have a minimum level of competence in geriatrics. The general competence of health care professionals is ensured via mechanisms of state- or jurisdiction-based licensure and national board certification, both of which may require completion of a verbal examination, a written examination, or minimum amounts of annual education and training. Professional licensure provides the primary and most comprehensive route to ensure that practitioners are competent in the principles of geriatric care, since virtually all health care professionals must be licensed in order to provide care. Board certification, a voluntary process, is a secondary mechanism to ensure geriatric competency of professionals. Often neither licensure nor certification examinations have explicit geriatric content, or, if they do, the content is inadequate to ensure competency. By comparison, many of these examinations have explicit content concerning other patient populations, most notably pediatric populations.

The committee considered many mechanisms for facilitating the improvement of competence in geriatrics, including requiring schools to improve curricula as a basis of accreditation or requiring a certain percentage of continuing education hours to be spent on geriatric issues. Ultimately, the committee concluded that the most comprehensive way to facilitate this change would be through the explicit inclusion of geriatrics content on examinations for licensure and certification.

Recommendation 4-2: All licensure, certification, and maintenance of certification for health care professionals should include demonstration of competence in the care of older adults as a criterion.

For many professionals, education and training programs are devised to prepare students for licensure and certification examinations, and so the inclusion of geriatrics in standardized examinations may encourage schools to increase the levels of geriatric education in their curricula. Exceptions may be made where appropriate (i.e., certain pediatric specialists and obstetricians). More will need to be done to improve the tools that evaluate this competence, such as ensuring the breadth and depth of questions on examinations are adequate to prove competence. In addition, educators, professional organizations, board examiners, and state licensing boards will need to work together to determine the best methods for assuring that the educational and training curricula for each discipline are devised to impart the competencies (i.e., knowledge, skills, and abilities) that these examinations will assess.


Developing an effective health care workforce for older Americans will require taking a number of factors into account, including the demands of the future elderly population and changes that may affect the education and training of professionals. Furthermore, needs may develop for new types of workers and new skill sets, especially in light of new models of care and the emergence of new technologies. This section describes alternatives to traditional education, including the greater use of distance education and community colleges. Distance education is an efficient way to spread geriatric knowledge held by a small number of experts to large numbers of professionals, while community colleges can train certain types of new and existing workers, providing a source of education for some professionals who might have previously received only on-the-job training and also offering a way to standardize training. Finally, the section examines how emerging technologies and models of care may create needs for new types of workers or skill sets. This includes the possibility of having current workers take on different jobs so as to create a more flexible workforce that uses all individuals efficiently (to their maximum levels of competence).

Internet-Based Education

In recent years there has been a significant increase in the use of Internet-based education for the initial and continuing education and training of professionals in geriatrics (Gainor et al., 2004; Supiano et al., 2002; Swagerty et al., 2000). This is one way to achieve wider dissemination of geriatric knowledge, especially to those—such as health care providers in rural areas—who are unable to attend courses because of geographic, financial, and time-based constraints (Murphy-Southwick and McBride, 2006). Internet-based education is also a useful tool for dealing with the lack of available leaders to teach the various courses.

Educators recognize that distance education has a number of valuable attributes, such as improved access to geriatric materials for non-traditional students, increased access to experts, and an increased ability to share information among disciplines. A survey of members of the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education found that 35 percent of the member institutions used distance education, with most of them (79 percent) having been using the modality for less than 5 years (Johnson, 2004). A survey of various medical education programs found that 79 percent used the Internet for geriatric education, and 56 percent reported that they were currently developing Internet-based products (Hajjar et al., 2007). There is also evidence, however, that some Internet-based geriatric information is of poor or inadequate quality (Hajjar et al., 2005).

Community Colleges

Innovative community college programs have great potential for playing a role in both the initial and the continuing geriatric education of certain professionals. Indeed, community colleges have already been instrumental in the education and training of large parts of the health care workforce for older patients. For example, community colleges educate a large number of the nurses who receive associate degrees (Mahaffey, 2002), and they provide refresher courses to those nurses already in the workforce (Sussman, 2006). Community colleges may provide career ladder programs for entry-level workers and partner with nursing homes and home health agencies to develop programs for continuing education.

Community colleges have also been essential in the development of many new certificate programs and education courses. Community colleges have the advantage of being able to tailor programs to local needs and state-based requirements and to use approaches that will be most acceptable to workers in that community. Recognizing this, the Allied and Auxiliary Health Care Workforce Project, sponsored by the California HealthCare Foundation and the California Endowment, funded seven model programs at community colleges to create new courses and credentialing processes for health care workers (Chapman et al., 2004). Mt. San Antonio College, one recipient of the funding created a new certificate program for entry-level mental health workers. City College of San Francisco and Jewish Vocational Services created a “Gateway to Health Careers Program” to introduce local residents to health care careers and to provide basic skills training for college readiness. Community college programs offer one approach to standardizing curricula for new types of workers who care for older patients and to ensuring the competency of those workers.

The federal government supports the use of community colleges to train new health workers. For example, the Employment and Training Administration within the U.S. Department of Labor supports Community-Based Job Training Grants that increase the capacity of community colleges to provide training in high-demand industries. Examples include a $2 million grant to Polk Community College in Florida to address the shortage of cardiovascular technologists and technicians to meet the demand from older patients and a $2.1 million grant to Manchester Community College in Connecticut to produce a larger number of graduates in nursing and allied health (DOL, 2006).


New technologies will affect how health care is delivered. These technologies may require providers to acquire new skills, such as how to operate new devices or to monitor patients from a distance via telemedicine, and that may change which types of providers are used to perform certain functions (Mullan, 2002). For example, imaging clinicians may need to expand their skill sets by learning how to operate and interpret a number of different imaging modalities, or new sub-specialty jobs may be created for people with expertise in a single specific imaging modality. The technologies most likely to affect the health care workforce in terms of types of workers and the necessary skill sets include

  • technologies that may alter clinical practice, such as new forms of imaging and minimally invasive surgery;
  • technologies that may use the workforce more efficiently, such as remote monitoring;
  • technologies that may improve access to information, such as electronic health records; and
  • technologies that may improve ergonomics, such as assistive devices for patient mobility and transport, and that may help prevent injury to workers (Health Technology Center, 2007).

As new technologies emerge, current workers will have to adapt to their use by acquiring new skills, or new types of workers may appear. While some technologies may impose new responsibilities on the health care workforce, others may relieve workers of their current duties or replace them altogether. One class of technologies that will be of particular importance to the health care workforce in light of current and future shortages are those technologies that will help older adults in the performance of activities of daily living (ADLs) and thus reduce the need for health care workers in this area. These technologies are discussed in more depth in Chapter 6.

New Professions

The health care workforce has a history of creating new professions in response to need, often as a result of the emergence of new technologies or the development of new models of care. At other times, new professions arise because of a serious shortage of providers. The profession of physician assistants, for example, was created in the 1960s to meet the urgent need for providers of primary care. In the same way, new professions may arise in response to the demand for services from older populations.

One type of new worker that has recently emerged in the care of older adults is the geriatric care manager. This new role stems from the development of a formal title for a care coordinator, a job which currently is often undertaken by a variety of providers without formal recognition. In most states, anyone can use this title without any requirement of training or certification (Stone et al., 2002), although many geriatric care managers are certified in other professions, most often in either social work or nursing. Recently, however, the number of certification programs for care managers has surged; one survey found more than 40 different certification designations that might be appropriate for care managers, such as “certified family life educator” and “certified case manager” (Reinhardt, 2003). As more people become aware of the importance of care coordination, especially for the older, frail elderly population, it can be expected that there will be increased need for health care workers who can fill this role. At the same time, the competencies needed to be an effective care manager will need to be developed, a task that will be made more difficult by the fact that no one profession “owns” this position.

Expanding Roles

To compensate for the serious shortages of providers that will characterize the coming decades, workers will need to be used more efficiently. More specifically, health care providers of all levels of education and training will need to assume additional responsibilities—or relinquish some responsibilities that they already have—to help ensure that all members of the health care workforce are used at their highest level of competence. Some professionals will likely need to increase their skills in order to be competent in more areas of care, while higher-level professionals may need to delegate some duties in order to be able to devote more of their time to providing the complex services that only they can provide. (See Chapters 3 and 5 for more on job delegation.) However, professionals are often not prepared for the role of delegator. For example, while RNs are increasingly responsible for supervision and delegation of care tasks to assistive personnel, they often are not taught the necessary decision-making skills associated with this role (Parsons, 1999). One survey of newly graduated baccalaureate nurses pointed to lack of education as the single most important barrier to effective delegation and that skills were generally learned through trial and error (Thomas and Hume, 1998). Formal efforts to help nurses learn these skills are increasing, often through continuing education (Kleinman and Saccomano, 2006).

States can play a role in changing the structure of the health care workforce by passing laws that recognize scopes of practice for new types of providers and that expand the legal scope of work for existing providers, although this may be controversial among professional groups (Carson-Smith and Minarik, 2007; RCHWS, 2003; Rossi, 2003; Wing et al., 2004). For example, there has been a great deal of debate in the United States over the use of advanced dental hygienists—known as dental therapists in other countries—to provide some basic dental services to underserved patients (Mertz and O’Neil, 2002; Ryan, 2003). And, as has been seen with team-based training, physicians are often reluctant to delegate responsibilities for care to other workers (Reuben et al., 2004). Among nurses, the delegation of medication administration duties from RNs to CNAs or unlicensed personnel has received much attention (Reinhard et al., 2003). First, there is extreme variation and ambiguity in state laws regarding which tasks may be delegated, ranging from the ability to merely remind patients to take their medications to physical administration of the medication. Confusion about these tasks has led to concern for liability among nursing supervisors. Second, there have been some concerns for patient safety. However, little research has been performed to examine the impact of using CNAs or unlicensed personnel for medication administration on patient care, such as comparison of medication error rates between RNs and unlicensed staff. But, some RNs argue that these workers have fewer distractions, leading to more accurate delivery of medications (Reinhard et al., 2003).

There is good deal of precedent for the idea of expanding scopes of work or delegating responsibilities in response to workforce needs. Both the physician assistant and the advanced nurse practitioner professions, for instance, have undergone expansions of their legal scopes of practice, most notably in the state-based regulations regarding prescription authority. There has also been an expansion of work roles among many types of allied workers. For example, some physicians have trained their medical assistants to teach self-management skills to patients (Bodenheimer, 2007). And pharmacy technicians have assumed increased responsibility for tasks not requiring professional clinical judgment (Muenzen et al., 2005). While pharmacy technicians most often dispense medications and maintain inventory, they have increasingly become involved in more skilled areas, such as in supervising processes of quality assurance (e.g., medication order entry and separating similar-looking or similar-sounding medications). In response, many state boards of pharmacy have allowed a broadening of pharmacy technician responsibilities.

As new or enhanced scopes of practice are developed, effort will be needed to avoid policies that impede the flexible and effective use of these personnel. While a detailed discussion of state scope-of-practice laws is beyond the scope of this report, the issue is central to improving the capacity of the health care workforce for older Americans.


Health care providers who care for older patients serve a complex, challenging population, and evidence shows that working with geriatric patients is highly satisfying. One study showed, for example, that geriatric medicine has the highest percentage of “very satisfied” specialists among physicians surveyed in the 1996-1997 Community Tracking Physician Survey (Leigh et al., 2002). Another study found that 79 percent of geriatricians surveyed felt their geriatric fellowship had a positive effect on their career satisfaction level, and almost 90 percent said they would recommend a geriatric fellowship to others (Shah et al., 2006). In spite of this, many geriatric fellowship positions remain unfilled. Among professionals who have a choice, most do not choose geriatric specialties or choose to work in long-term care settings. Among high school students considering a nursing career almost half have no interest in specializing in geriatrics, whereas 87 percent report having an interest in pediatric nursing (Evercare, 2007). In 2002, 15 percent of the RN positions and 13 percent of the LPN positions at nursing homes were vacant (National Commission on Nursing Workforce for Long-Term Care, 2005).

This section describes the barriers to recruitment and retention of professionals in geriatric fields, with a particular emphasis on the recruitment technique of offering financial support in exchange for service commitments. Many of these barriers are not unique to the health care professionals who care for older patients, but this section will focus specifically on these issues as they relate to the health care professionals who care for older patients or who work primarily in long-term care settings.


The barriers to recruiting and retaining health care professionals in the geriatric field include negative stereotypes of working with older patients, the complexity of geriatric cases, a lack of mentors, the availability of more attractive opportunities in non-health care professions, and also various financial disincentives. It is particularly difficult to retain and recruit care providers into institutional long-term care because of the stressful and physically demanding working conditions, relatively low salaries, and low job satisfaction. Turnover of health care professionals in these settings contributes to poorer patient outcomes and increased turnover of other workers. For example, increased turnover of RNs has been associated with decreased quality of care (Castle and Engberg, 2005); high rates of turnover among nursing home administrators and managers has been associated with both poorer patient outcomes and increased turnover of RNs and LPNs (Castle, 2001, 2005).

This section highlights some of the challenges to the recruitment and retention of health care providers to care for older patients. The first challenge discussed is that the workforce itself is aging. Large groups of workers are expected to retire in the coming decades, and they will have to be replaced, which will only heighten the need for health care providers. The second challenge is that stereotypes persist about caring for older patients; many assume that the work is depressing and that most older patients are extremely sick, frail, or demented. Next is the lack of opportunity for providers to receive advanced training in geriatrics; if no training opportunities exist, health care professionals will be unable or unwilling to specialize in geriatric care. The last challenges discussed are the financial ones. Because of the costs of extra training and the failure of payment systems to compensate geriatric specialists properly, financial disincentives are probably the greatest obstacles to the recruitment and retention of more geriatric-specific health care professionals. The section concludes with an examination of the use of programs that offer financial support in exchange for service commitments.

Aging of the Health Care Workforce

One challenge to the health care workforce in general is the aging of its members. As of January 2007, 23.3 percent of all active physicians were 60 or older (AAMC, 2007a). In 2001, 81 percent of all dentists were over age 45, and the number of dentists expected to retire by 2020 is larger than the number of new dentists expected to enter the workforce by that time (Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2005). By 2020 almost half of all registered nurses will be over age 50 (AHA, 2007; Buerhaus et al., 2000), and about one-third of all currently practicing social workers will soon be of retirement age (National Commission for Quality Long-Term Care, 2007).

More needs to be done to retain some of these older workers, recognizing their importance as on-the-job mentors, most likely by the development of less physically demanding roles or more flexible work schedules (Rosenfeld, 2007). Their roles could be made less physically demand ing, for instance, by the development of technologies that perform the more labor-intensive of their duties. Another retention strategy would be to recruit older workers into leadership roles (Rosenfeld, 2007). Retired geriatric-health professionals have invaluable knowledge and expertise, and they could become academic leaders in the training of future generations. This would be of great value, especially considering the scarcity of faculty described above. Retired generalists, with additional training, could also re-enter their fields as geriatric experts. The social work profession has embraced this concept with the development of the Retired Social Workers Project, which uses both distance and in-person education to train retired social workers in geriatric concepts so that they might return to the workforce to assist older patients (IGSW, 2007).

Negative Stereotypes

While the current elderly population is healthier and more educated and has higher rates of volunteerism than previous generations of the same age, negative stereotypes of older adults persist, including that they are typically physically disabled, senile, and disconnected from social activities (Krout and McKernan, 2007; Wood and Mulligan, 2000). In spite of the job satisfaction that has been documented among geriatric providers, students still see working with these populations as depressing, which may be one of the reasons that when students are asked about their specialization preferences, they continue to rank geriatrics near the bottom (Anderson and Wiscott, 2004; Cummings and Galambos, 2002).

Early exposures to a broad range of geriatric patients—and especially to healthier older adults—has a positive effect on interest in geriatric fields (Bernard et al., 2003; Cummings et al., 2003, 2005; Linn and Zeppa, 1987; Medina-Walpole et al., 2002; Reuben et al., 1995; Woolsey, 2007). One particularly effective strategy for providing students with this sort of positive experience is pairing them with older patients who act as mentors (Corwin et al., 2006; Stewart and Alford, 2006; Waldrop et al., 2006). In such a mentoring program a student will typically meet regularly with a healthy older adult over a certain period of time, often to complete specific assignments; the older patient acts to sensitize the student to the positive aspects of aging, to dispel myths, and to create empathy for the frustrations faced by seniors. A second strategy whose effectiveness is supported by evidence is to expose students to professional role models or mentors who reinforce the positive aspects of geriatric care and, by doing so, inspire students to enter geriatric fields themselves (Hazzard, 1999; Johnson and Valle, 1996; Maas et al., 2006; Mackin et al., 2006; Medina-Walpole et al., 2002).

Lack of Opportunity

The recruitment of health care professionals to become geriatric specialists is often hindered by a simple lack of opportunity. As discussed previously, many professionals have neither adequate introduction to geriatrics nor opportunities for advanced training in the field. While GME supports the general training of physicians in geriatrics, workers in other professions often lack the opportunity for advanced training in geriatrics, usually because there is not enough funding for the programs or not enough funding for salary support.

Indeed, this is part of a pattern that extends far beyond geriatrics. Generally speaking, with the exception of physicians, few professionals have significant support for advanced training. In response, some efforts have arisen in recent years to increase the training opportunities for these professionals. The Medicare program, for example, not only supports the training of residents but has made some payments to hospitals for its share of the direct costs of nursing and allied health training programs. In 2001 Congress introduced the All Payer Graduate Medical Education Act,12 which would collect additional GME funds through a 1 percent tax on private health plans. Part of this revenue was directed toward the graduate education of “non-physician health professionals” (AAMC, 2007b). The Nurse Education, Expansion, and Development Act13 proposes to provide grants to nursing schools, in part, to develop “post-baccalaureate residency programs to prepare nurses for practice in specialty areas where nursing shortages are more severe.” These measures are for the training of professionals in general, however, and do not necessarily support advanced geriatric training.

In the area of geriatrics, advanced training programs for professionals other than physicians often must look to private foundations for support, or else it falls to the individual students to pay for the programs without any source of subsidy. For example, in 2007 the John A. Hartford Foundation awarded a $5 million renewal grant to the Gerontological Society of America for the purpose of preparing doctoral students in geriatric social work (The John A. Hartford Foundation, 2007).

Financial Concerns

Financial burdens create great challenges in the recruitment and retention of all types of professionals.

Recommendation 4-3: Public and private payers should provide fi nancial incentives to increase the number of geriatric specialists in all health professions.

Specific types of financial incentives will be recommended throughout the rest of this chapter. Medicare and Medicaid policies will be especially important in the implementation of financial incentives due both to their role in the financing of health care services for older adults as well as the influence of their policies on other payers.

The costs associated with extra years of geriatric training do not translate into additional income, and geriatric specialists tend to earn significantly less income than specialists in other areas and often less than the generalists within their own fields. In fact, the additional training needed to become a geriatric specialist has been shown to have a negative effect on future earnings. In 1999 a physician who pursued a 1-year geriatric medicine fellowship stood to lose $7,016 annually, and the completion of a 2-year fellowship translated into a net annual loss of $8,592 (Weeks and Wallace, 2004). In 2005 a geriatrician’s median salary was only 93 percent of the median salary for a general internist (ADGAP, 2007b). Similar disparities exist for other professions. For instance, compared with nurses in hospital settings, full-time RNs who work in nursing homes or other extended-care facilities receive lower annual earnings on average, even though they work more hours per week, incur more hours of overtime, and have a larger percentage of overtime hours that are mandatory (HRSA, 2006b). PAs who specialize in geriatrics have lower salaries than other types of PAs (AAPA, 2007). One survey of recent MSW graduates showed that while 70 percent strongly agreed that geriatric care is an important part of social work, only 36 percent strongly agreed that geriatric social work offered good career opportunities (Cummings et al., 2003).

In part this income disparity is due to the fact that a larger proportion of a geriatric specialist’s reimbursement tends to come from Medicare and Medicaid. Additionally, as the population ages, many non-geriatric specialists will experience similar difficulties. Rates of reimbursement are low for primary care codes in general, especially as compared with the procedural codes typically used by other specialists. Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements do not take into account the fact that the care of frail older adults with complex care needs is very time-consuming, a situation that causes geriatric specialists to have fewer patient encounters and fewer billings (MedPAC, 2003).

Recommendation 4-3a: All payers should include a specific enhance ment of reimbursement for clinical services delivered to older adults by practitioners with a certification of special expertise in geriatrics.

This enhancement should apply to all types of professionals certified in geriatric care. Several mechanisms can and should be used to facilitate this enhancement due to the variety of providers and mechanisms for delivery of compensation. Whatever the mechanism, this enhancement should raise salaries enough to create greater appeal to entering geriatric fields.

As one example, in 2005, the net clinical compensation of a geriatrician was about $163,000, while that of a general internal medicine physician was about $175,000 (ADGAP, 2007d). However, the disparities between geriatric medicine and other subspecialties of internal or family medicine are even greater. Table 4-5 shows that other non-procedure driven subspecialties of internal medicine have markedly higher fill rates for advanced training programs, as well as substantially higher salaries.

TABLE 4-5. Fill Rate for Subspecialty Training in Internal Medicine Programs and Median Compensation.


Fill Rate for Subspecialty Training in Internal Medicine Programs and Median Compensation.

In this example, to raise salaries for the existing geriatricians from $163,000 to $200,000 (to be in accordance with other similar subspecialties) for each of the existing 7,128 geriatricians would cost about $263 million. However, the committee supports creating incentives to markedly increase the number of providers. The committee presents two hypothetical examples of estimates for extra annual costs (due to payment enhancements) under assumptions associated with two different goals for the growth in number of certified geriatricians. Under the first scenario (Table 4-6), the goal is to double the number of geriatricians over 10 years; this goal requires a 20 percent increase in the number of geriatric fellows graduating annually. Under the second scenario (Table 4-7), the goal is to triple the number of geriatricians over 20 years; this goal requires a 10 percent annual increase in the number of fellows graduating annually. The committee recognizes both of these goals are ambitious and beyond the capacity of the current system to produce these numbers of graduates unless significant changes are made. These differing scenarios, however, serve to provide two different strategies that highlight the amount of effort that will be needed to close the gap between the numbers of current supply and the numbers needed in the future. Ultimately, the chosen strategy will depend on the ability of the current system to increase its capacity, the development of an increased interest in geriatrics among providers, and the availability of immediate and future funding sources. While the committee recognizes the current high level of attrition among these providers, it also contends that attrition will likely decrease if greater financial incentives exist. Estimates do not take attrition into account.

TABLE 4-6. Timeline for Extra Costs Associated with Geriatrician Salary Increase Assuming Doubling of Numbers Over 10 Years.


Timeline for Extra Costs Associated with Geriatrician Salary Increase Assuming Doubling of Numbers Over 10 Years.

TABLE 4-7. Timeline for Extra Costs Associated with Geriatrician Salary Increase Assuming Tripling of Numbers Over 20 Years.


Timeline for Extra Costs Associated with Geriatrician Salary Increase Assuming Tripling of Numbers Over 20 Years.

One mechanism to increase salaries would be to develop a special fee schedule for services provided by geriatric specialists that increased the relative value of the provider. Another option would be to create a new modifier that allows for increased payment. Modifiers are added to billing codes to indicate special circumstances surrounding the delivery of a service. For example, the “22” modifier recognizes that “For any given procedure code, there could typically be a range of work effort or practice expense required to provide the service. Thus, carriers may increase or decrease the payment for a service only under very unusual circumstances based upon review of medical records and other documentation” (CMS, 2007). This modifier is currently only available for surgical procedures and involves much documentation to justify its use, but it serves as an example of how a modifier could be developed for use by geriatric specialists for billing purposes.

Other aspects of reimbursement policies can create financial disincentives to geriatric specialization. For instance, Medicare and Medicaid often lack codes for care coordination and other advance services; by supporting these types of advanced services through the development of “medical homes,” Medicare could realize savings of as much as $194 billion over 10 years (Commonwealth Fund, 2007). And insurers often allow only for a pharmacist dispensing fee, failing to reimburse for advanced pharmacist services, including those activities shown to improve patient outcomes or lower health care costs. In response to these concerns, the 2006 implementation of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 established a mechanism by which pharmacists are eligible to receive payment for providing medication-therapy management services as a benefit of the Part D program (CMS, 2005). Psychiatrists thinking of specializing in geriatrics may be pushed toward other areas since Medicare requires a 50 percent copayment for outpatient mental health services, compared to 20 percent for most other medical services (ADGAP, 2007a). Furthermore, Medicare does not cover any routine oral-health services.

Financial burdens affect the recruitment and retention of clinical and academic geriatric experts. A 2004 survey of second-year MSW students found that over 60 percent expressed interest in an aging-related internship—if a stipend were available for this activity (Cummings et al., 2005). Junior faculty in geriatrics have lower compensation than those in family or internal medicine (ADGAP, 2004). At higher faculty positions the median dollars paid to those in geriatrics become similar to those paid for other specialties, but the pay of geriatrics specialists still lags behind that of the higher-paid procedural specialties. Between 2002 and 2003 salaries for geriatric physician faculty decreased by 3 percent; during this time period, family medicine salaries increased by 1.5 percent, and general internal medicine salaries remained the same.

GACAs have been instrumental in the development of academic geriatricians. These awards are especially appealing since the grants directly support teaching services during the life of the award.

Recommendation 4-3b: Congress should authorize and fund an en hancement of the Geriatric Academic Career Award (GACA) program to support junior geriatrics faculty in other health professions in addi tion to allopathic and osteopathic medicine.

The committee supports the extension of GACAs to all doctorate-level health care professionals. As has been discussed, many of the geriatric specialties are limited by the availability of faculty and mentors. The creation of GACAs for other doctoral-level health care professions would help to promote not only the geriatric professions, but would enable educational programs to better educate all professionals in the care of older adults. Recognizing the lag time between the initial training of professionals until the time they are available to become faculty, these training opportunities should begin now.

In June 2007, Senator Bingaman introduced a bill14 that would provide GACAs to doctorate level nurses certified in geriatrics or geropsychiatry. This bill proposed a funding level of $1.875 million per fiscal year (plus administrative costs) to allow for a total of 125 5-year awards for $75,000 in total between 2008 and 2015. A loftier goal could be to have one GACA at every institution that prepares advanced practice professionals. For ex ample, about 81 programs exist to prepare geriatric nurse practitioners. The availability of a $75,000 GACA for each of these 81 faculty positions would amount to about $6.1 million annually (plus administrative costs) for the nursing profession alone. (Similar efforts should be made for other professions.) The committee recognizes that geriatric educators are also needed at institutions that do not have specific programs in geriatrics, as all professionals need to be trained in geriatric principles. However, the availability of these awards at advanced programs is an achievable first step.

To avoid some of the pitfalls experienced by the GACA program for physicians, the committee supports making the GACA an institutional award (instead of an individual award). Additionally, as the number of professionals entering the different disciplines increases, the number of GACAs needs to proportionately increase.

Linking Financial Support to Service

Most efforts to recruit and retain professionals for in-need populations seek to relieve professionals of at least part of the financial burden associated with their education and training. These recruitment efforts usually consist of offering some type of financial support—generally scholarships or loan forgiveness, or both—in exchange for the professional promising to serve a certain number of years with a population in need. Programs exist at both the state and national levels, and many programs entail a collaboration between the two. Five general types of programs link financial support and service (Table 4-8).

TABLE 4-8. Classification of Support-for-Service Programs.


Classification of Support-for-Service Programs.

Scholarships and loan repayments are by far the most common types of programs. However, very few studies have assessed the effect of these programs on completion of service or retention of practitioners (Pathman et al., 2000). These programs also change frequently without any evidence of immediate or lasting effectiveness. Since they are the most common, the rest of this section will focus on scholarship and loan-repayment programs.

State Efforts

Many states attempt to recruit needed members to the health care workforce with programs that offer financial support in exchange for future service. Such programs date back to the 1940s. In 1987 HRSA created the State Loan Repayment Program (SLRP), which authorizes the National Health Service Corps (discussed below) to provide matching funds to states that develop educational loan-repayment programs. These funds are specifically designated for primary care physicians in exchange for service in a so-called health-professions shortage area, or HPSA.

Some state-level programs operate with federal support, while others operate without. A 1996 survey found that 82 programs in 41 states supported almost 1,700 professionals (Pathman et al., 2000). Most of these programs (84 percent) supported medical students, residents, and practicing physicians; about half (44 percent) were available to PAs and APRNs, and about 20 percent were available to other professionals, such as dentists and podiatrists. The programs offered support amounts that ranged from $3,000 to $38,000 annually, and they had service commitments ranging from 1 to 60 months.

When Pathman and colleagues sought to evaluate the effectiveness of state-level support-for-service programs, they found that participants in such programs practiced in needier areas and cared for more Medicaid and uninsured patients than non-participants (Pathman et al., 2004). Retention was also slightly higher for participants in the program than it was for non-participants. Overall, loan repayment and direct financial incentives proved to be the most successful methods. Scholarships and other student-focused programs were challenged by the administrative burden of keeping track of these students over the course of their educational paths.

Some state-level loan-repayment programs focus specifically on geriatricians. For example, in May 2005 South Carolina introduced the Geriatric Loan Forgiveness Program, which forgives $35,000 of medical school debt for each year of fellowship training in geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry; loan forgiveness is dependent on the physician practicing in the state of South Carolina for at least 5 years (Lt. Governor’s Office on Aging, 2005).

Indian Health Service

The Indian Health Service (IHS) Loan Repayment Program repays up to $20,000 in education loans per year (plus additional tax benefits) for practitioners in certain health professions who commit to practicing for at least 2 years in an IHS facility or other approved program (IHS, 2007). While all professionals are eligible for this program, physicians and nurses usually get highest priority.

National Institutes of Health Loan Repayment Program

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) offers loan repayment to doctoral-level researchers in exchange for commitments to perform research. For a 2-year commitment the NIH pays off up to $35,000 per year of educational debt, plus additional tax benefits. Individuals may perform the research at any nonprofit organization, university, or government organization. Loan repayment is currently available for researchers in

  • clinical research;
  • pediatric research;
  • health-disparities research;
  • clinical research for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds; and
  • contraception and infertility research (NIH, 2007g).

Repayment for researchers in clinical research comprises more than half of the NIH repayment program’s contracts and funds. For fiscal year 2006, 38 percent of the 1,044 new applications and 71 percent of the 777 renewal applications for clinical research were accepted (NIH, 2007a). More than half of the contracts for clinical research were made with medical doctors; other clinicians given contracts included optometrists, dentists, psychologists, pharmacists, doctors of naturopathic medicine, and doctors of osteopathic medicine (NIH, 2007d). Contracts for clinical research totaled almost $40 million (for 945 contracts), and contracts for pediatric research totaled $18.8 million (for 403 contracts). Contracts for all five areas of research together added up to approximately $70 million (for 1,651 contracts) (NIH, 2007b,c,d,e,f).

National Health Service Corps

Perhaps the best known program offering health professionals financial support for educational and training expenses in exchange for service is the National Health Service Corps (NHSC). The NHSC, which was established in 1972 in an amendment to the Emergency Health Personnel Act, operates as part of the Public Health Service and places health care practitioners in HPSAs. Under the loan-forgiveness program, practitioners receive up to $25,000 per year of service for the first 2 years of service. After completing that 2-year minimum, commitments may be extended annually, and practitioners who extend their service in the HPSA beyond the first 2 years can receive as much as $35,000 in loan forgiveness per year in the succeeding years. Reviews of the effectiveness of the NHSC have been mixed, mostly because of questions about its ability to retain practitioners over the long term (Mullan, 1999; Pathman et al., 2006). The fiscal year 2006 budget for the NHSC was about $125.4 million, of which $85.2 million was used for the loan-repayment and scholarship programs (HRSA, 2007a). Over its entire history, more than 27,000 professionals have served with the NHSC, and currently about 4,000 are in service (HRSA, 2007d). The NHSC recruits the following types of professionals:

  • Primary care physicians
  • Nurse practitioners
  • Dentists
  • Mental and behavioral health professionals
  • Physician assistants
  • Certified nurse-midwives
  • Dental hygienists

In addition to loan forgiveness for the various types of professionals, the NHSC offers scholarships for students in

  • allopathic medical schools;
  • osteopathic medical schools;
  • family nurse practitioner and nurse-midwifery programs;
  • physician assistant programs; and
  • dental schools.

These scholarships pay for up to 4 years of education, including tuition and related educational expenses plus a stipend. Students commit to 1 year of service in a shortage area for each year of financial support (with a 2-year minimum).

Little has been done to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the NHSC. However, a 1995 report found that, as is the case with in-state programs, NHSC scholarship programs have worse outcomes (in terms of service completion, satisfaction, and retention) and higher administrative costs than loan-repayment programs (GAO, 1995). Indeed, the report showed that loan-repayment participants end up costing the government one-half to one-third less than scholarship recipients.

Recently, members of Congress proposed the use of NHSC to improve the recruitment and retention of geriatricians. The most recent attempt was the Geriatricians Loan Forgiveness Act of 2007,15 which called for fellowship years in either geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry to be recognized as a period of service to an underserved population. Similar bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate multiple times, so far without success.

The committee concluded that programs that link financial support to service have been effective in increasing the numbers of health care professionals that serve in underserved areas of the country and that they serve as good models for the development of similar programs to address shortages of geriatric providers.

For example, as discussed above, some geriatric professions have existing opportunities for advanced training, but practitioners do not pursue the positions (e.g., only 54 percent of available first-year positions in geriatric medicine were filled in 2006-2007). If financial support was available, it might encourage professionals to pursue such advanced training. The availability of scholarships could also get students interested in geriatrics earlier in their careers, which in turn would create a need for the development of more robust geriatric curricula and more advanced training options.

Recommendation 4-3c: States and the federal government should in stitute programs for loan forgiveness, scholarships, and direct financial incentives for professionals who become geriatric specialists. One such mechanism should include the development of a National Geriatric Service Corps, modeled after the National Health Service Corps.

One mechanism to create incentives for students to enter geriatric specialties is a National Geriatric Health Service Corps which would offer loan repayment for newly graduating professionals in geriatrics. There are many mechanisms for achieving this increased recruitment and retention; loan repayment is one example. For example, the committee estimated the costs required to institute loan repayment for graduating fellows of geriatric medicine. As in Tables 4-6 and 4-7, the committee presents costs for a loan repayment program associated with two hypothetical goals: to either double the number of geriatricians over 10 years, or to triple their numbers over 20 years. Under these scenarios, the costs for loan repayment for physicians is estimated at $35,000 per year for 4 years (or $140,000 per physician). Tables 4-9 and 4-10 demonstrate rough estimates for loan repayment to graduating fellows of geriatric medicine based on 2008 dollars assuming, as in Tables 4-6 and 4-7, either a 20 percent or 10 percent annual increase in the number of geriatric fellows.

TABLE 4-9. Timeline for Costs Associated with Geriatrician Loan Repayment Assuming Doubling of Numbers Over 10 Years.


Timeline for Costs Associated with Geriatrician Loan Repayment Assuming Doubling of Numbers Over 10 Years.

TABLE 4-10. Timeline for Costs Associated with Geriatrician Loan Repayment Assuming Tripling of Numbers Over 20 Years.

TABLE 4-10

Timeline for Costs Associated with Geriatrician Loan Repayment Assuming Tripling of Numbers Over 20 Years.


This chapter addressed the education, training, recruitment, and retention of the professional health care workforce. Overall, there is an inadequate supply of professionals in general for meeting the health care needs of the future older adults and also an inadequate number of geriatric specialists both to care for these patients and to teach other professionals about geriatric care. Although the situation is improving, most professional education programs still do not have sufficient geriatric content in their curricula or adequate experiences in clinical settings. When the opportunity exists, most professionals are not choosing to receive specialized training in geriatrics, and some professions lack the opportunity for advanced geriatric training. Distance-education programs and community colleges are providing viable alternatives for the education and training of many professionals in geriatric principles. The future workforce will likely need to fulfill new roles, be more flexible, and possess new skills. The committee recommends that more be done to increase the breadth of geriatric experiences among health care professionals and to ensure the geriatric competence of all providers.

Barriers to recruitment and retention include the aging of the workforce itself and negative stereotypes about working with older adults. Financial disincentives include disparities in the reimbursement system, such as lack of payment for care coordination, and the high costs associated with advanced training. The committee recommends that financial incentives be implemented in order to encourage more professionals to become geriatric specialists; such incentives should include the enhancement of payments to geriatric specialists, an expansion of the GACA program, and the institution of loan forgiveness, scholarships, or direct financial incentives to assist with the high costs of tuition among all types of health care professionals who care for older adults. While all of these areas have shown improvement, much more needs to be done to educate, train, recruit, and retain a competent and ample professional workforce to care for the older population in 2030.


  • AACN (American Association of Colleges of Nursing). 2004. Nurse practitioner and clinical nurse specialist competencies for older adult care . http://www​.hartfordign​.org/case_study/Geriatric​%20Competencies%20for%20non-GNPs​.pdf (accessed February 1, 2008).
  • AACN. 2006. Student enrollment rises in U.S. nursing colleges and universities for the 6th consecutive year . http://www​ (accessed July 9, 2007).
  • AACPM (American Association of Colleges of Podiatric Medicine). 2007. American As sociation of Colleges of Podiatric Medicine: School links . http://www​​/html/collegelinks/cl_schools.asp (accessed August 22, 2007).
  • AAMC (Association of American Medical Colleges). 2007. a. 2007 state physician workforce data book . http://med​​/docs/AAMC2007StateDataWorkbook.pdf (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • AAMC. 2007. b. All-payer” GME trust fund legislation . http://www​​/library/gme/gme0011.htm (accessed December 7, 2007).
  • AAMC. 2007. c. Medicare direct graduate medical education (DGME) payments . http://www​​/library/gme/gme0001.htm (accessed December 7, 2007).
  • AAMC/The John A. Hartford Foundation. 2007. Minimum geriatric competencies for medical students . http://www​ (accessed January 8, 2008).
  • AAPA (American Academy of Physician Assistants). 2007. 2007 AAPA physician assistant census report . Alexandria, VA: AAPA.
  • ABFM (American Board of Family Medicine). 2007. Certification/recertification examina tion content . https://www​​/cert/CertRecertExaminationOutline​.pdf (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • ABGD (American Board of General Dentistry). 2007. American Board of General Dentistry: Rules and procedures . http://www​​.htm#1 (accessed October 24, 2007).
  • ABIM (American Board of Internal Medicine). 2005. Maintenance of certification enrollment . http://www​​.shtm (accessed October 23, 2007).
  • ABIM. 2006. ABIM recognizes added qualifications as subspecialties of internal medi cine . http://www​​/news/06_07_14_added_q.aspx (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • ABIM. 2007. Internal medicine certification examination blueprint . http://www​​/blueprint/im_cert.pdf (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • ABMS (American Board of Medical Specialties). 2006. ABMS establishes new subspecialty certificate in hospice and palliative medicine . http://www​​/downloads​/NewSubcertPalliativeMed.pdf (accessed December 26, 2007).
  • ABMS. 2007. Recognized physician specialty and subspecialty certificates . http://www​​/Physicians/specialties.aspx (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • ABPN (American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology). 2007. a. Certification statistics . http://www​ (accessed March 9, 2007).
  • ABPN. 2007. b. Initial certification in the subspecialty of geriatric psychiatry . http://www​ (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • ABPN. 2007. c. Part I examination in psychiatry A: 2008 content outline . http://www​​/content_outlines​/Initial%20Cert​/2008_PartI_Psych_AandB.pdf (accessed January 4, 2008).
  • ACCP (American College of Clinical Pharmacy). 2007. Directory of residencies, fellowships, and graduate programs . http://www​ (accessed December 4, 2007).
  • Ackermann, R. J., and K. A. Kemle. 1998. The effect of a physician assistant on the hospitalization of nursing home residents. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 46(5): 610-614. [PubMed: 9588375]
  • Acosta, D., and P. Olsen. 2006. Meeting the needs of regional minority groups: The University of Washington’s programs to increase the American Indian and Alaskan Native physician workforce. Academic Medicine 81(10):863-870. [PubMed: 16985341]
  • ADA (American Dietetic Association). 2008. Dietetics education curriculum requirements . http://www​​/cps/rde/xchg/ada/hs​.xsl/CADE_813_ENU_HTML.htm (accessed February 9, 2008).
  • ADGAP (Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs). 2004. Financial compensation for geriatricians in academic and private practice. Training & Practice Update 2(2):1-7.
  • ADGAP. 2005. Geriatricians and geriatric psychiatrists. Training & Practice Update 3(1): 1-7.
  • ADGAP. 2007. a. Chief resident immersion training in the care of older adults: A national dissemination of the successful Boston University Medical Center program . http://www​.Americangeriatrics​.org/adgap/crit/default.asp (accessed August 20, 2007).
  • ADGAP. 2007. b. Fellows in geriatric medicine and geriatric psychiatry programs. Training & Practice Update 5(2):1-7.
  • ADGAP. 2007. c. Fiscal year 2007 awardees . http://www​.Americangeriatrics​.org/adgap/2007ghp_awards.asp (accessed December 4, 2007).
  • ADGAP. 2007. d. Table 1.7: Total annual compensation for private practice physicians, 2001- 2005 . http://www​.adgapstudy​ (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • AGS (American Geriatrics Society). 2004. Curriculum guidelines for geriatrics training in inter nal medicine residency programs . http://www​.Americangeriatrics​.org/education/resident.shtml (accessed October 25, 2007).
  • AHA (American Hospital Assocation). 2007. Trends affecting hospitals and health systems, April 2007 . http://www​​/research-and-trends​/chartbook/2007chartbook.html (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • AIDS InfoNet. 2007. Fact Sheet 616: Older people and HIV . http://www​​/content/whatis/art6036.html?ts=pf (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • Alliance for Aging Research. 2002. Medical never-never land: Ten reasons why America is not ready for the coming age boom . Washington, DC: Alliance for Aging Research.
  • ANA (American Nurses Association). 2007. Nurse competence in aging . http://www​.nursingworld​.org/MainMenuCategories​/ThePracticeofProfessionalNursing​/NursingKnowledge​/NurseCompetenceinAging​.aspx (accessed December 26, 2007).
  • Anderson, D., and R. Wiscott. 2004. Comparing social work and non-social work students’ attitudes about aging: Implications to promote work with elders. Journal of Gerontologi cal Social Work 42(2):21-36.
  • Anderson, S. 2007. Deadly consequences: The hidden impact of America’s nursing shortage . Arlington, VA: National Foundation for American Policy.
  • APPAP (Association of Postgraduate AP Programs). 2008. APPAP programs by specialty . http://www​ (accessed January 2, 2008).
  • APTA (American Physical Therapy Association). 2007. Section on geriatrics: Health pro motion & wellness SIG . http://www​.geriatricspt​.org/members/sig-health.cfm (accessed October 28, 2007).
  • ASA (American Society on Aging). 2007. HIV hits 100,000 older adults—and climbing. Aging Today, 28(2):7-8.
  • ASHP (American Society of Health-System Pharmacists). 2007. Online residence directory . http://www​​/residency_index​.asp?CID=1212&DID=1254 (accessed December 4, 2007).
  • ASPE (Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2006. The supply and demand of professional social workers providing long-term care services . Washington, DC: ASPE Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy.
  • ASWB (Association of Social Work Boards). 2007. ASWB exam information: Examination content outlines . http://www​​_info_NEW_content_outlines.shtml (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • Barry, T., D. Brannon, and V. Mor. 2005. Nurse aide empowerment strategies and staff stability: Effects on nursing home resident outcomes. Gerontologist 45(3):309-317. [PubMed: 15933271]
  • Bednash, G., C. Fagin, and M. Mezey. 2003. Geriatric content in nursing programs: A wakeup call. Nursing Outlook 51(4):149-150. [PubMed: 12949471]
  • Berkman, B., B. Silverstone, W. J. Simmons, P. J. Volland, and J. L. Howe. 2000. Social work gerontological practice: The need for faculty development in the new millennium. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 34(1):5-23.
  • Berman, A., M. Mezey, M. Kobayashi, T. Fulmer, J. Stanley, D. Thornlow, and P. Rosenfeld. 2005. Gerontological nursing content in baccalaureate nursing programs: Comparison of findings from 1997 and 2003. Journal of Professional Nursing 21(5):268-275. [PubMed: 16179239]
  • Bernard, M. A., W. J. McAuley, J. A. Belzer, and K. S. Neal. 2003. An evaluation of a low-intensity intervention to introduce medical students to healthy older people. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 51(3):419-423. [PubMed: 12588589]
  • Billings, J. A., and S. Block. 1997. Palliative care in undergraduate medical education: Status report and future directions. Journal of the American Medical Association 278(9): 733-738. [PubMed: 9286833]
  • BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2007. a. Fastest growing occupations, 2006-2016 (November 2007 Monthly Employment Review). http://www​ (accessed December 17, 2007).
  • BLS. 2007. b. Occupational outlook handbook, 2008-09 edition: Licensed practical and li censed vocational nurses . http://www​ (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • BLS. 2007. c. Occupational outlook handbook, 2008-09 edition: Physician assistants . http://www​ (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • BLS. 2007. d. Occupational outlook handbook, 2008-09 edition: Social workers . http://www​ (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • BLS. 2008. Occupational outlook handbook (OOH), 2008-09 edition. http://www​ (accessed January 3, 2008).
  • Blumenthal, D., M. Gokhale, E. G. Campbell, and J. S. Weissman. 2001. Preparedness for clinical practice: Reports of graduating residents at academic health centers. Journal of the American Medical Association 286(9):1027-1034. [PubMed: 11559286]
  • Bodenheimer, T. 2007. A 63-year-old man with multiple cardiovascular risk factors and poor adherence to treatment plans. Journal of the American Medical Association 298(17): 2048-2055. [PubMed: 17986698]
  • Bonnel, W. 2003. Nutritional health promotion for older adults: Where is the content? Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners 15(5):224-229. [PubMed: 12800803]
  • Bragg, E. J., and G. A. Warshaw. 2005. ACGME requirements for geriatrics medicine curricula in medical specialties: Progress made and progress needed. Academic Medicine 80(3):279-285. [PubMed: 15734811]
  • Bragg, E. J., G. A. Warshaw, C. Arenson, M. L. Ho, and D. E. Brewer. 2006. A national survey of family medicine residency education in geriatric medicine: Comparing findings in 2004 to 2001. Family Medicine 38(4):258-264. [PubMed: 16586172]
  • Brand, M. 2007. The future healthcare workforce for older Americans: Rural recruitment and retention . Presentation at Meeting of the Committee on the Future Health Care Workforce for Older Americans, San Francisco, CA. June 28, 2007.
  • Brotherton, S. E., and S. I. Etzel. 2006. Graduate medical education, 2005-2006. Journal of the American Medical Association 296(9):1154-1169. [PubMed: 17370353]
  • Brotherton, S. E., and S. I. Etzel. 2007. Graduate medical education, 2006-2007. Journal of the American Medical Association 298(9):1081-1096. [PubMed: 17785657]
  • Brotman, S., B. Ryan, and R. Cormier. 2003. The health and social service needs of gay and lesbian elders and their families in Canada. Gerontologist 43(2):192-202. [PubMed: 12677076]
  • Brugna, R. A., J. F. Cawley, and M. D. Baker. 2007. Physician assistants in geriatric medicine. Clinical Geriatrics 15(10):22-29.
  • Buerhaus, P. I., D. O. Staiger, and D. I. Auerbach. 2000. Implications of an aging registered nurse workforce. Journal of the American Medical Association 283(22):2948-2954. [PubMed: 10865272]
  • Cahill, S., K. South, and J. Spade. 2000. Outing age: Public policy issues affecting gay, les bian, bisexual and transgender elders . New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute.
  • Carson-Smith, W. Y., and P. A. Minarik. 2007. Advanced practice nurses: A new skirmish in the continuing battle over scope of practice. Clinical Nurse Specialist 21(1):52-54. [PubMed: 17213741]
  • Castle, N. G. 2001. Administrator turnover and quality of care in nursing homes. Gerontolo gist 41(6):757-767. [PubMed: 11723344]
  • Castle, N. G. 2005. Turnover begets turnover. Gerontologist 45(2):186-195. [PubMed: 15799983]
  • Castle, N. G., and J. Engberg. 2005. Staff turnover and quality of care in nursing homes. Medical Care 43(6):616-626. [PubMed: 15908857]
  • Cavalieri, T. A., P. Basehore, E. Perweiler, and A. Chopra. 1999. Training osteopathic geriatric academicians: Impact of a model geriatric residency program. Journal of the American Osteopathic Association 99(7):371-376. [PubMed: 10441936]
  • CCP (Council on Credentialing in Pharmacy). 2006. Credentialing in pharmacy . Washington, DC: CCP.
  • Center for Health Workforce Studies. 2005. The impact of the aging population on the health workforce in the United States . Rensselaer, NY: School of Public Health, University at Albany.
  • Center for Health Workforce Studies. 2006. Licensed social workers serving older adults, 2004 . Rensselaer, NY: School of Public Health, University at Albany.
  • Chapman, S. A., J. A. Showstack, E. M. Morrison, P. E. Franks, L. Y. Woo, and E. H. O’Neil. 2004. Allied health workforce: Innovations for the 21st century . San Francisco, CA: Center for the Health Professions, University of California, San Francisco.
  • Cheeti, K., and J. D. Schor. 2002. Long-term care experience in an internal medicine residency program. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 3(3):125-129. [PubMed: 12807654]
  • Cianciolo, P. K., and L. L. Zupan. 2004. Developing a training program on issues in aging for correctional workers. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(3):23-38. [PubMed: 15871935]
  • Cipher, D. J., R. S. Hooker, and E. Sekscenski. 2006. Are older patients satisfied with physician assistants and nurse practitioners? Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants 19(1):36, 39-40,42-44. [PubMed: 16433221]
  • CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services). 2005. Medicare prescription drug benefit; final rule. Federal Register 70:4279-4283.
  • CMS. 2007. Medicare claims processing manual: Chapter 12—Physicians/nonphysician prac titioners . http://www​​/manuals/downloads/clm104c12.pdf (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • Commonwealth Fund. 2007. Bending the curve: Options for achieving savings and improving value in U.S. health spending . New York: The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System.
  • Cooksey, J. A., K. K. Knapp, S. M. Walton, and J. M. Cultice. 2002. Challenges to the pharmacist profession from escalating pharmaceutical demand. Health Affairs 21(5):182-188. [PubMed: 12224881]
  • Cooper, H., C. Carlisle, T. Gibbs, and C. Watkins. 2001. Developing an evidence base for interdisciplinary learning: A systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 35(2): 228-237. [PubMed: 11442702]
  • Corwin, S. J., K. Frahm, L. A. Ochs, C. E. Rheaume, E. Roberts, and G. P. Eleazer. 2006. Medical student and senior participants’ perceptions of a mentoring program designed to enhance geriatric medical education. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 26(3):47-65. [PubMed: 16446271]
  • Cummings, S. M., and V. A. DeCoster. 2003. The status of specialized gerontological training in graduate social work education. Educational Gerontology 29(3):235-250.
  • Cummings, S. M., and C. Galambos. 2002. Predictors of graduate social work students’ interest in aging-related work. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 39(3):77-94.
  • Cummings, S. M., C. Galambos, and V. A. DeCoster. 2003. Predictors of MSW employment in gerontological practice. Educational Gerontology 29(4):295-312.
  • Cummings, S. M., G. Adler, and V. A. DeCoster. 2005. Factors influencing graduate-social-work students’ interest in working with elders. Educational Gerontology 31(8):643-655.
  • DOL (Department of Labor). 2006. The president’s community-based job training grants . http://www​​/business/Community-BasedJobTrainingGrants.cfm (accessed February 6, 2007).
  • Donald W. Reynolds Foundation. 2007. Aging & quality of life . http://www​.dwreynolds​.org/Programs/National​/Aging/AboutAging.htm (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • Dyer, C. B., K. Hyer, K. S. Feldt, D. A. Lindemann, J. Busby-Whitehead, S. Greenberg, R. D. Kennedy, and E. Flaherty. 2003. Frail older patient care by interdisciplinary teams: A primer for generalists. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(2):51-62. [PubMed: 15871930]
  • Eleazer, G. P., R. Doshi, D. Wieland, R. Boland, and V. A. Hirth. 2005. Geriatric content in medical school curricula: Results of a national survey. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53(1):136-140. [PubMed: 15667390]
  • Ersek, M., and B. R. Ferrell. 2005. Palliative care nursing education: Opportunities for gerontological nurses. Journal of Gerontological Nursing 31(7):45-51. [PubMed: 16047959]
  • Evercare. 2007. Evercare survey of graduating high school seniors finds prospective nurses lack interest in geriatrics despite growing senior population . http://home​.businesswire​.com/portal/site/google/index​.jsp?ndmViewId​=news_view&newsId​=20070801005845&newsLang=en (accessed August 27, 2007).
  • Fagin, C. M., P. D. Franklin, D. I. Regenstreif, and G. J. Huba. 2006. Overview of the John A. Hartford Foundation Building Academic Geriatric Nursing Capacity Initiative. Nursing Outlook 54(4):173-182. [PubMed: 16890035]
  • Fields, S., and C. Nicastri. 2004. Health promotion/disease prevention in older adults—an evidence-based update: Part II: Counseling, chemoprophylaxis, and immunizations. Clini cal Geriatrics 12(12):18-26.
  • Fitzgerald, J. T., B. C. Williams, J. B. Halter, T. L. Remington, M. A. Foulk, N. W. Persky, and B. R. Shay. 2006. Effects of a geriatrics interdisciplinary experience on learners’ knowledge and attitudes. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 26(3):17-28. [PubMed: 16446269]
  • Flaherty, E., K. Hyer, R. Kane, N. Wilson, N. Whitelaw, and T. Fulmer. 2003. Using case studies to evaluate students’ ability to develop a geriatric interdisciplinary care plan. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(2):63-74. [PubMed: 15871931]
  • Fulmer, T., K. Hyer, E. Flaherty, M. Mezey, N. Whitelaw, M. Orry Jacobs, R. Luchi, J. C. Hansen, D. A. Evans, C. Cassel, E. Kotthoff-Burrell, R. Kane, and E. Pfeiffer. 2005. Geriatric interdisciplinary team training program: Evaluation results. Journal of Aging and Health 17(4):443-470. [PubMed: 16020574]
  • Gainor, S. J., R. T. Goins, and L. A. Miller. 2004. Using online modules is a multi-modality teaching system: A high-touch high-tech approach to geriatric education. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(4):45-59. [PubMed: 15142827]
  • GAO (Government Accountability Office). 1995. National Health Service Corps: Opportuni ties to stretch scarce dollars and improve provider placement . Washington, DC: GAO.
  • GAO. 2006. Health professions education programs: Action still needed to measure impact . Washington, DC: GAO.
  • Gawande, A. 2007. The way we age now: Medicine has increased the ranks of the elderly. Can it make old age any easier? New Yorker April 30:50-59. [PubMed: 17508461]
  • Gill, T. M. 2005. Education, prevention, and the translation of research into practice. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53(4):724-726. [PubMed: 15817025]
  • Goodwin, M., and J. E. Morley. 1994. Geriatric research, education and clinical centers: Their impact in the development of American geriatrics. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 42(9):1012-1019. [PubMed: 8064090]
  • Graber, D. R., J. P. Bellack, C. Lancaster, C. Musham, J. Nappi, and E. H. O’Neil. 1999. Curriculum topics in pharmacy education: Current and ideal emphasis. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 63(2):145-151.
  • GSWI (Geriatric Social Work Initiative). 2007. Hartford faculty scholars . http://www​ (accessed August 1, 2007).
  • Hachmuth, F. A., and J. M. Hootman. 2001. What impact on PA education? A snapshot of ambulatory care visits involving PAs. Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants 14(12):22-24, 27. [PubMed: 11824088]
  • Hajjar, I., S. A. Gable, V. P. Jenkinson, L. T. Kane, and R. A. Riley. 2005. Quality of Internet geriatric health information: The GeriatricWeb project. Journal of the American Geriat rics Society 53(5):885-890. [PubMed: 15877570]
  • Hajjar, I. M., J. G. Ruiz, T. A. Teasdale, and M. J. Mintzer. 2007. The use of the Internet in geriatrics education: Results of a national survey of medical geriatrics academic programs. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 27(4):85-95. [PubMed: 17537717]
  • Hall, P., and L. Weaver. 2001. Interdisciplinary education and teamwork: A long and winding road. Medical Education 35(9):867-875. [PubMed: 11555225]
  • Harrington, C., H. Carrillo, and C. LaCava. 2006. Nursing facilities, staffing, residents and facility deficiencies, 1999 through 2005 . http://www​.pascenter​.org/documents/OSCAR2005.pdf (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • Hart, L. G., S. M. Skillman, M. Fordyce, M. Thompson, A. Hagopian, and T. R. Konrad. 2007. International medical graduate physicians in the United States: Changes since 1981. Health Affairs 26(4):1159-1169. [PubMed: 17630460]
  • Hash, K. M., J. Gottlieb, K. V. Harper-Dorton, G. Crawley-Woods, K. Shelek-Furbee, J. D. Smith, and R. Brown. 2007. Infusing and sustaining aging content in social work education: Findings from gerorich projects. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 28(1): 1-18. [PubMed: 18032179]
  • Hawes, C., C. D. Phillips, S. Holan, M. Sherman, and L. L. Hutchison. 2005. Assisted living in rural America: Results from a national survey. Journal of Rural Health 21(2):131-139. [PubMed: 15859050]
  • Hazzard, W. R. 1999. Mentoring across the professional lifespan in academic geriatrics. Jour nal of the American Geriatrics Society 47(12):1466-1470. [PubMed: 10591244]
  • Hazzard, W. R. 2003. General internal medicine and geriatrics: Collaboration to address the aging imperative can’t wait. Annals of Internal Medicine 139(7):597-598. [PubMed: 14530233]
  • Health Technology Center. 2007. (unpublished). Health care workforce and future technolo gies . Paper commissioned by the IOM Committee on the Future Health Care Workforce for Older Americans.
  • Heinemann, G. D., editor; , and A. M. Zeiss, editor. , eds. 2002. Team performance in health care . New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Henry, L. R., and R. S. Hooker. 2007. Retention of physician assistants in rural health clinics. Journal of Rural Health 23(3):207-214. [PubMed: 17565520]
  • Herndon, C. M., K. Jackson Ii, D. S. Fike, and T. Woods. 2003. End-of-life care education in United States pharmacy schools. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine 20(5):340-344. [PubMed: 14529036]
  • Holley, J. L., S. S. Carmody, A. H. Moss, A. M. Sullivan, L. M. Cohen, S. D. Block, and R. M. Arnold. 2003. The need for end-of-life care training in nephrology: National survey results of nephrology fellows. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 42(4):813-820. [PubMed: 14520633]
  • Hooker, R. S., and L. E. Berlin. 2002. Trends in the supply of physician assistants and nurse practitioners in the United States. Health Affairs 21(5):174-181. [PubMed: 12224880]
  • Hooker, R. S., D. J. Cipher, and E. Sekscenski. 2005. Patient satisfaction with physician assistant, nurse practitioner, and physician care: A national survey of Medicare beneficiaries. Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management 12(2):88-92.
  • Howard, D. L., C. D. Bunch, W. O. Mundia, T. R. Konrad, L. J. Edwards, M. Ahinee Amamoo, and Y. Jallah. 2006. Comparing United States versus international medical school graduate physicians who serve African-American and white elderly. Health Services Research 41(6):2155-2181. [PMC free article: PMC1955313] [PubMed: 17116114]
  • Howe, J. L., and D. W. Sherman. 2006. Interdisciplinary educational approaches to promote team-based geriatrics and palliative care. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 26(3):1-16. [PubMed: 16446268]
  • HRSA (Health Resources and Services Administration). 1995. A national agenda for geriatric education: White papers . Washington, DC: HRSA.
  • HRSA. 2000. The pharmacist workforce: A study of the supply and demand for pharmacists . Washington, DC: HRSA.
  • HRSA. 2003. National Advisory Council on Nurse Education and Practice: Third report to the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Congress . Washington, DC: HRSA.
  • HRSA. 2005. a. Geriatric training for physicians, dentists, and behavioral and mental health pro fessions: FY 2005 grantee contracts and abstracts . http://bhpr​​/interdisciplinary/gtpd05.htm (accessed August 8, 2007).
  • HRSA. 2005. b. Residency training in general and pediatric dentistry—FY 2005 grant sum maries . http://bhpr​​/medicine-dentistry/05summaries/dental​.htm#la (accessed January 4, 2008).
  • HRSA. 2006. a. The rationale for diversity in the health professions: A review of the evidence . http://bhpr​​/healthworkforce/reports​/diversity/default.htm (accessed December 26, 2007).
  • HRSA. 2006. b. The registered nurse population: Findings from the March 2004 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses . Washington, DC: HRSA.
  • HRSA. 2007. a. Fiscal year 2008 justification of estimates for appropriations committees: Clinician recruitment and service . http://www​​/budgetjustification08​/Clinicianrecruitment.htm (accessed December 4, 2007).
  • HRSA. 2007. b. Fiscal year 2008 justification of estimates for appropriations committees: Health professions . http://www​​/budgetjustification08​/ComprehensiveGeriatricEducation​.htm (accessed December 7, 2007).
  • HRSA. 2007. c. Geriatric education centers . http://bhpr​​/interdisciplinary/gec.html (accessed February 12, 2007).
  • HRSA. 2007. d. National health service corps: About NHSC: Our achievements . http://nhsc​.bhpr.hrsa​.gov/about/our/where.asp (accessed October 29, 2007).
  • IFAS (Institute for the Future of Aging Services). 2008. LVN leadership enrichment and de velopment (LVN LEAD) . http://www​.futureofaging​.org/developing_workforce​/current_projects​/workforce_projects/lvn_project​.asp (accessed February 9, 2008).
  • IGSW (Institute for Geriatric Social Work). 2007. Institute for geriatric social work: Education & training . http://www​​.html (accessed March 13, 2007).
  • IHS (Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2007. Loan repayment program . http://www​​/DHPS/LRP/Intropro.asp (accessed October 29, 2007).
  • Inouye, S. K., S. T. Bogardus, Jr., D. I. Baker, L. Leo-Summers, and L. M. Cooney, Jr. 2000. The hospital elder life program: A model of care to prevent cognitive and functional decline in older hospitalized patients. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 48(12): 1697-1706. [PubMed: 11129764]
  • IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1978. Aging and medical education . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • IOM. 1993. Strengthening training in geriatrics for physicians . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • IOM. 1997. Approaching death: Improving care at the end of life . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • IOM. 2000. The role of nutrition in maintaining health in the nation’s elderly: Evaluating coverage of nutrition services for the Medicare population . Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [PubMed: 25077252]
  • IOM. 2004. In the nation’s compelling interest: Ensuring diversity in the health care work force . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • IOM. 2005. Quality through collaboration: The future of rural health . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • The John A. Hartford Foundation. 2007. Recent grants . http://www​.jhartfound​.org/recent_grants.htm (accessed February 9, 2008).
  • Johnson, H. A. 2004. Overview of geriatric distance education for academic courses and continuing education. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(4):9-22. [PubMed: 15142825]
  • Johnson, T. M., 2nd, and G. Valle. 1996. Mentoring in the growth and development of the geriatric fellow. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 44(12):1486-1487. [PubMed: 8951326]
  • Kales, H. C., A. R. DiNardo, F. C. Blow, J. F. McCarthy, R. V. Ignacio, and M. B. Riba. 2006. International medical graduates and the diagnosis and treatment of late-life depression. Academic Medicine 81(2):171-175. [PubMed: 16436580]
  • Kleinman, C. S., and S. J. Saccomano. 2006. Registered nurses and unlicensed assistive personnel: An uneasy alliance. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 37(4):162-170. [PubMed: 16892667]
  • Kovner, C. T., M. Mezey, and C. Harrington. 2002. Who cares for older adults? Workforce implications of an aging society. Health Affairs 21(5):78-89. [PubMed: 12224911]
  • Krout, J. A., and P. McKernan. 2007. The impact of gerontology inclusion on 12th grade student perceptions of aging, older adults and working with elders. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 27(4):23-40. [PubMed: 17537713]
  • LaMascus, A. M., M. A. Bernard, P. Barry, J. Salerno, and J. Weiss. 2005. Bridging the workforce gap for our aging society: How to increase and improve knowledge and training. Report of an expert panel. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53(2):343-347. [PubMed: 15673363]
  • Lecca, P. J., P. A. Valentine, and K. J. Lyons. 2003. Allied health: Practice issues and trends in the new millennium . Binghamton, NY: The Hawthorn Press, Inc.
  • Leigh, J. P., R. L. Kravitz, M. Schembri, S. J. Samuels, and S. Mobley. 2002. Physician career satisfaction across specialties. Archives of Internal Medicine 162(14):1577-1584. [PubMed: 12123400]
  • Leipzig, R. M. 2007. Medical student competencies in geriatric medicine . http://www​.americangeriatrics​.org/newsletter​/FIT/fall_2007_story01.asp (accessed January 29, 2008).
  • Leipzig, R. M., K. Hyer, K. Ek, S. Wallenstein, M. L. Vezina, S. Fairchild, C. K. Cassel, and J. L. Howe. 2002. Attitudes toward working on interdisciplinary healthcare teams: A comparison by discipline. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 50(6):1141-1148. [PubMed: 12110079]
  • Levenson, S. A., and D. Saffel. 2007. The consultant pharmacist and the physician in the nursing home: Roles, relationships, and a recipe for success. The Consultant Pharmacist 22(1):71-82. [PubMed: 17367254]
  • Levine, S. A., B. Brett, B. E. Robinson, G. A. Stratos, S. M. Lascher, L. Granville, C. Goodwin, K. Dunn, and P. P. Barry. 2007. Practicing physician education in geriatrics: Lessons learned from a train-the-trainer model. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 55(8):1281-1286. [PubMed: 17661970]
  • Li, F., K. J. Fisher, P. Harmer, and E. McAuley. 2002. Delineating the impact of Tai Chi training on physical function among the elderly. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 23(2 Suppl 1):92-97. [PubMed: 12133743]
  • Li, F., P. Harmer, K. J. Fisher, E. McAuley, N. Chaumeton, E. Eckstrom, and N. L. Wilson. 2005. Tai chi and fall reductions in older adults: A randomized controlled trial. Journals of Gerontology—Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 60(2):187-194. [PubMed: 15814861]
  • Linn, B. S., and R. Zeppa. 1987. Predicting third year medical students’ attitudes toward the elderly and treating the old. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 7(3-4):167-175. [PubMed: 3453341]
  • Linnebur, S. A., M. B. O’Connell, A. M. Wessell, A. D. McCord, D. H. Kennedy, G. DeMaagd, L. A. Dent, M. Y. Splinter, J. C. Biery, Jr., F. Chang, R. C. Jackson, S. L. Miller, and T. Sterling. 2005. Pharmacy practice, research, education, and advocacy for older adults. Pharmacotherapy 25(10):1396-1430. [PubMed: 16185185]
  • Lt. Governor’s Office on Aging. 2005. Lt. Governor André Bauer ratifies model legislation to boost number of geriatric practitioners in South Carolina . http://www​​/ltgov/aging/docs/PressReleases​/GeriatricLoanBillRatification06102005.pdf (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • Lubben, J. E., J. Damron-Rodriguez, and J. C. Beck. 1992. A national survey of aging curriculums in schools of social work. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 18(3-4): 157-171. [PubMed: 28949879]
  • Maas, M. L., N. E. Strumpf, C. Beck, D. Jennings, D. Messecar, and E. Swanson. 2006. Mentoring geriatric nurse scientists, educators, clinicians, and leaders in the John A. Hartford Foundation centers for geriatric nursing excellence. Nursing Outlook 54(4):183-188. [PubMed: 16890036]
  • MacEntee, M. I., M. Pruksapong, and C. C. Wyatt. 2005. Insights from students following an educational rotation through dental geriatrics. Journal of Dental Education 69(12):1368-1376. [PubMed: 16352773]
  • Mackin, L. A., J. Kayser-Jones, P. D. Franklin, L. K. Evans, E. M. Sullivan-Marx, K. A. Herr, E. A. Swanson, S. A. Lubin, and D. C. Messecar. 2006. Successful recruiting into geriatric nursing: The experience of the John A. Hartford Foundation centers of geriatric nursing excellence. Nursing Outlook 54(4):197-203. [PubMed: 16890038]
  • Magilvy, J. K., and J. G. Congdon. 2000. The crisis nature of health care transitions for rural older adults. Public Health Nursing 17(5):336-345. [PubMed: 11012996]
  • Mahaffey, E. H. 2002. The relevance of associate degree nursing education: Past, present, future. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing 7(2):24-36. [PubMed: 12059279]
  • Maramaldi, P., D. Gardner, B. Berkman, K. Ireland, S. D’Ambruoso, and J. L. Howe. 2004. Mentoring new social work faculty: A gerontological perspective. Gerontology & Geri atrics Education 25(1):89-106. [PubMed: 15364662]
  • Mather, M. 2007. (unpublished). State profiles of the U.S. health care workforce . Paper commissioned by the Committee on the Future Health Care Workforce for Older Americans.
  • Matter, C. A., J. A. Speice, R. McCann, D. A. Mendelson, K. McCormick, S. Friedman, A. Medina-Walpole, and N. S. Clark. 2003. Hospital to home: Improving internal medicine residents’ understanding of the needs of older persons after a hospital stay. Academic Medicine 78(8):793-797. [PubMed: 12915369]
  • Maurer, M. S., A. W. Costley, P. A. Miller, S. McCabe, S. Dubin, H. Cheng, E. Varela-Burstein, B. Lam, C. Irvine, K. P. Page, G. Ridge, and B. Gurland. 2006. The Columbia Cooperative Aging Program: An interdisciplinary and interdepartmental approach to geriatric education for medical interns. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 54(3):520-526. [PubMed: 16551323]
  • McBride, M. R., N. Morioka-Douglas, and G. Yeo. 1996. Aging and health: Asian and Pacific Island American elders , 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford Geriatric Education Center.
  • McElhone, A. L., Y. Limb, and S. R. Gambert. 2005. Health promotion/disease prevention in older adults—an evidence-based update. Part III: Nursing home population. Clinical Geriatrics 13(9):24-31.
  • Medina-Walpole, A., W. H. Barker, P. R. Katz, J. Karuza, T. Franklin Williams, and W. J. Hall. 2002. The current state of geriatric medicine: A national survey of fellowship-trained geriatricians, 1990 to 1998. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 50(5):949-955. [PubMed: 12028186]
  • MedPAC (Medicare Payment Advisory Commission). 2003. Impact of the resident caps on the supply of geriatricians . Washington, DC: MedPAC.
  • Melin, A. L., and L. O. Bygren. 1992. Efficacy of the rehabilitation of elderly primary health care patients after short-stay hospital treatment. Medical Care 30(11):1004. [PubMed: 1331632]
  • Mertz, E., and E. O’Neil. 2002. The growing challenge of providing oral health care services to all Americans. Health Affairs 21(5):65-77. [PubMed: 12224910]
  • Mezey, M., S. G. Burger, H. G. Bloom, A. Bonner, M. Bourbonniere, B. Bowers, J. B. Burl, E. Capezuti, D. Carter, J. Dimant, S. A. Jerro, S. C. Reinhard, and M. Ter Maat. 2005. Experts recommend strategies for strengthening the use of advanced practice nurses in nursing homes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53(10):1790-1797. [PubMed: 16181181]
  • MGMA (Medical Group Management Association). 2006. MGMA Physician Compensation and Production Survey: 2006 report based on 2005 data . Englewood, CO: MGMA.
  • Mitchell, D. A., and S. L. Lassiter. 2006. Addressing health care disparities and increasing workforce diversity: The next step for the dental, medical, and public health professions. American Journal of Public Health 96(12):2093-2097. [PMC free article: PMC1698162] [PubMed: 17077406]
  • Mohammad, A. R., P. M. Preshaw, and R. L. Ettinger. 2003. Current status of predoctoral geriatric education in U.S. dental schools. Journal of Dental Education 67(5):509-514. [PubMed: 12809185]
  • Moore, M. J., P. Moir, and M. M. Patrick. 2004. The state of aging and health in America: 2004 . Washington, DC: The Merck Institute of Aging and Health.
  • Muenzen, P. M., M. M. Corrigan, M. A. Mobley Smith, and P. G. Rodrigue. 2005. Updating the pharmacy technician certification examination: A practice analysis study. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 62(23):2542-2546. [PubMed: 16303914]
  • Mullan, F. 1999. The muscular samaritan: The National Health Service Corps in the new century. Health Affairs 18(2):168-175. [PubMed: 10091445]
  • Mullan, F. 2002. Time-capsule thinking: The health care workforce, past and future. Health Affairs 21(5):112-122. [PubMed: 12224872]
  • Murphy-Southwick, C., and M. McBride. 2006. Geriatric education across 94 million acres: Adapting conference programming in a rural state. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 26(4):25-36. [PubMed: 16537306]
  • NABP (National Association of Boards of Pharmacy). 2008. NAPLEX blueprint. http://www​​/NABP01/updatednaplexblueprint​.pdf (accessed January 4, 2008).
  • NAHOF (National Association on HIV Over Fifty). 2007. Educational tip sheet: HIV/AIDS and older adults . http://hivoverfifty​.org/tip.html (accessed October 10, 2007).
  • NASW (National Association of Social Workers). 2007. New aging specialty credentials . http://www​​/credentials/specialty/aging.asp (accessed August 23, 2007).
  • National Commission for Quality Long-Term Care. 2007. From isolation to integration: Recommendations to improve quality in long-term care . http://www​.qualitylongtermcarecommission​.org/pdf/Final_Report_NCQLTC_20071203​.pdf (accessed January 17, 2008).
  • National Commission on Nursing Workforce for Long-Term Care. 2005. Act now: For your tomorrow . http://cowl​.org/documents​/The%20National​%20Commission%20on%20Nursing​%20Workforce​%20for%20Long%20Term%20Care2.pdf (accessed January 17, 2008).
  • National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care. 2004. Clinical practice guidelines for quality palliative care . http://www​.nationalconsensusproject​.org/Guideline.pdf (accessed January 17, 2008).
  • NCCPA (National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants). 2008. Exams: Con tent blueprint . http://www​ (accessed January 3, 2008).
  • NCSBN (National Council of State Boards of Nursing). 2007. NCLEX-RNÆ examination . https://www​​/RN_Test_Plan_2007_Web.pdf (accessed January 2, 2008).
  • NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). 1994. Emergency medical technician-basic: National Standard Curriculum . http://www​​.gov/people/injury/ems/pub/emtbnsc.pdf (accessed February 7, 2008).
  • NIA (National Institute on Aging). 1987. Personnel for health needs of the elderly through the year 2020 . Bethesda, MD: Department of Health and Human Services.
  • Nicastri, C., and S. Fields. 2004. Health promotion/disease prevention in older adults—an evidence-based update: Part I: Introduction and screening. Clinical Geriatrics 12(11): 17-25.
  • NICHE (Nurses Improving Care for Health System Elders). 2008. NICHE models . http://www​.nicheprogram​.org/about/models/ (accessed February 9, 2008).
  • NIH (National Institutes of Health). 2007. a. Clinical research loan repayment program . http://lrp​​/about/lrp-clinical.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. b. National Institutes of Health loan repayment program: Contraception and in fertility research . http://lrp​​/about/extramural​/images/ICdegree_CIR06.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. c. National Institutes of Health loan repayment program: Extramural clinical research for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds . http://lrp​​/about/extramural​/images/ICdegree_DB06.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. d. National Institutes of Health loan repayment program: Extramural clinical research LRP . http://lrp​​/about/extramural​/images/ICdegree_EC06.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. e. National Institutes of Health loan repayment program: Extramural pediatric research LRP . http://lrp​​/about/extramural​/images/ICdegree_EP06.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. f. National Institutes of Health loan repayment program: Health disparities re search LRP . http://lrp​​/about/extramural​/images/ICdegree_HD06.htm (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • NIH. 2007. g. NIH loan repayment programs . http://www​ (accessed December 28, 2007).
  • Odegard, P. S., R. M. Breslow, M. J. Koronkowski, B. R. Williams, and G. A. Hudgins. 2007. Geriatric pharmacy education: A strategic plan for the future. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 71(3). [PMC free article: PMC1913301] [PubMed: 17619647]
  • Olshansky, S. J., D. J. Passaro, R. C. Hershow, J. Layden, B. A. Carnes, J. Brody, L. Hayflick, R. N. Butler, D. B. Allison, and D. S. Ludwig. 2005. A potential decline in life expectancy in the United States in the 21st century. New England Journal of Medicine 352(11):1138-1145. [PubMed: 15784668]
  • Olson, T. H., J. Stoehr, A. Shukla, and T. Moreau. 2003. A needs assessment of geriatric curriculum in physician assistant education. Perspective on Physician Assistant Education 14(4):208-213.
  • Paice, J. A., B. R. Ferrell, R. Virani, M. Grant, P. Malloy, and A. Rhome. 2006. Graduate nursing education regarding end-of-life care. Nursing Outlook 54(1):46-52. [PubMed: 16487780]
  • Pan, C. X., S. Carmody, R. M. Leipzig, E. Granieri, A. Sullivan, S. D. Block, and R. M. Arnold. 2005. There is hope for the future: National survey results reveal that geriatric medicine fellows are well-educated in end-of-life care. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53(4):705-710. [PubMed: 15817021]
  • Parsons, L. 1999. Building RN confidence for delegation decision-making skills in practice. Journal for Nurses in Staff Development 15(6):263-269. [PubMed: 10839068]
  • Pathman, D. E., D. H. Taylor, Jr., T. R. Konrad, T. S. King, T. Harris, T. M. Henderson, J. D. Bernstein, T. Tucker, K. D. Crook, C. Spaulding, and G. G. Koch. 2000. State scholarship, loan forgiveness, and related programs: The unheralded safety net. Journal of the American Medical Association 284(16):2084-2092. [PubMed: 11042757]
  • Pathman, D. E., T. R. Konrad, T. S. King, D. H. Taylor, Jr., and G. G. Koch. 2004. Outcomes of states’ scholarship, loan repayment, and related programs for physicians. Medical Care 42(6):560-568. [PubMed: 15167324]
  • Pathman, D. E., G. E. Fryer, Jr., R. L. Phillips, J. Smucny, T. Miyoshi, and L. A. Green. 2006. National Health Service Corps staffing and the growth of the local rural non-NHSC primary care physician workforce. Journal of Rural Health 22(4):285-293. [PubMed: 17010024]
  • RCHWS (Regional Center for Health Workforce Studies, Center for Health Economics and Policy, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio). 2003. Changes in the scope of practice and the supply of non-physician clinicians in Texas . San Antonio, TX: Regional Center for Health Workforce Studies.
  • Reinhard, S. C., H. Young, R. A. Kane, and W. V. Quinn. 2003. Nurse delegation of medica tion administration of elders . Rutgers, NJ: Rutgers Center for State Health Policy.
  • Reinhardt, U. E. 2003. Does the aging of the population really drive the demand for health care? Health Affairs 22(6):27-39. [PubMed: 14649430]
  • Remington, T. L., M. A. Foulk, and B. C. Williams. 2006. Evaluation of evidence for interprofessional education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 70(3). [PMC free article: PMC1636959] [PubMed: 17136186]
  • Reuben, D. B., J. T. Fullerton, J. M. Tschann, and M. Crougban-Minihane. 1995. Attitudes of beginning medical students toward older persons: A five-campus study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 43(12):1430-1436. [PubMed: 7490398]
  • Reuben, D. B., M. N. Yee, K. D. Cole, M. S. Waite, L. O. Nichols, B. A. Benjamin, G. Zellman, and J. C. Frank. 2003. Organizational issues in establishing geriatrics interdisciplinary team training. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 24(2):13-34. [PubMed: 15871928]
  • Reuben, D. B., L. Levy-Storms, M. N. Yee, M. Lee, K. Cole, M. Waite, L. Nichols, and J. C. Frank. 2004. Disciplinary split: A threat to geriatrics interdisciplinary team training. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 52(6):1000-1006. [PubMed: 15161469]
  • Rhee, L. Q., N. S. Wellman, V. H. Castellanos, and S. P. Himburg. 2004. Continued need for increased emphasis on aging in dietetics education. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 104(4):645-649. [PubMed: 15054351]
  • Rosen, A. L., J. L. Zlotnick, A. L. Curl, and R. G. Green. 2000. CSWE/SAGE-SW national competencies survey and report . Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.
  • Rosenfeld, P. 2007. Workplace practices for retaining older hospital nurses: Implications from a study of nurses with eldercare responsibilities. Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice 8(2):120-129. [PubMed: 17652629]
  • Rossi, M. S. 2003. Law enhances hygienists’ duties, frees dentists for complex cases. The New York State Dental Journal 69(9):8-9. [PubMed: 14702760]
  • Rubin, C. D., H. Stieglitz, B. Vicioso, and L. Kirk. 2003. Development of geriatrics-oriented faculty in general internal medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine 139(7):615-620. [PubMed: 14530245]
  • Ryan, C., and D. Futterman. 1998. Lesbian & gay youth: Care & counseling . New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Ryan, J. 2003. Improving oral health: Promise and prospects . Washington, DC: National Health Policy Forum.
  • Saltz, C. C. 1997. From issues to actions. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 27(3): 89-95.
  • Scharlach, A., J. Damron-Rodriguez, B. Robinson, and R. Feldman. 2000. Educating social workers for an aging society: A vision for the 21st century. Journal of Social Work Edu cation 36(3):521-538.
  • Schatz, B., and K. O’Hanlan. 1994. Anti-gay discrimination in medicine: Results of a national survey of lesbian, gay and bisexual physicians . San Francisco, CA: American Association of Physicians for Human Rights.
  • Segal-Gidan, F. 2002. Who will care for the aging American population? Journal of the Ameri can Academy of Physician Assistants 15(12). [PubMed: 12555733]
  • Shah, U., M. Aung, S. Chan, and G. P. Wolf-Klein. 2006. Do geriatricians stay in geriatrics? Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 27(1):57-65. [PubMed: 16873209]
  • Simon, S. R., A. R. Fabiny, and J. Kotch. 2003. Geriatrics training in general internal medicine fellowship programs: Current practice, barriers, and strategies for improvement. Annals of Internal Medicine 139(7):621-627. [PubMed: 14530246]
  • Stewart, T., and C. Alford. 2006. Introduction: Older adults in medical education—Senior mentor programs in U.S. medical schools. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 27(2):3-10. [PubMed: 17023379]
  • Stone, R., S. C. Reinhard, J. Machemer, and D. Rudin. 2002. Geriatric care manager: A profile of an emerging profession . Washington, DC: AARP Public Policy Institute.
  • Sullivan, A. M., M. D. Lakoma, and S. D. Block. 2003. The status of medical education in end-of-life care: A national report. Journal of General Internal Medicine 18(9):685-695. [PMC free article: PMC1494921] [PubMed: 12950476]
  • Supiano, M. A., J. C. Fantone, and C. Grum. 2002. A web-based geriatrics portfolio to document medical students’ learning outcomes. Academic Medicine 77(9):937-938. [PubMed: 12228110]
  • Sussman, D. 2006. Refresher training helps nurses reenter workforce. T and D 60(9):65-67.
  • Swagerty, D., Jr., S. Studenski, R. Laird, and S. Rigler. 2000. A case-oriented web-based curriculum in geriatrics for third-year medical students. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 48(11):1507-1512. [PubMed: 11083333]
  • SWLI (Social Work Leadership Institute). 2007. Practicum partnership program . http://socialwork​.nyam​.org/nsw/ppp/about.php (accessed October 28, 2007).
  • Tarn, D. M., L. S. Meredith, M. Kagawa-Singer, S. Matsumura, S. Bito, R. K. Oye, H. Liu, K. L. Kahn, S. Fukuhara, and N. S. Wenger. 2005. Trust in one’s physician: The role of ethnic match, autonomy, acculturation, and religiosity among Japanese and Japanese Americans. Annals of Family Medicine 3(4):339-347. [PMC free article: PMC1466902] [PubMed: 16046567]
  • Tellis-Nayak, V. 2007. A person-centered workplace: The foundation for person-centered caregiving in long-term care. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 8(1):46-54. [PubMed: 17210502]
  • Thomas, D. C., R. M. Leipzig, L. G. Smith, K. Dunn, G. Sullivan, and E. Callahan. 2003. Improving geriatrics training in internal medicine residency programs: Best practices and sustainable solutions. Annals of Internal Medicine 139(7):628-634. [PubMed: 14530247]
  • Thomas, S., and G. Hume. 1998. Delegation competencies: Beginning practitioners’ reflections. Nurse Educator 23(1):38-41. [PubMed: 9505694]
  • Tilliss, T. S., S. E. Lavigne, and K. Williams. 1998. Geriatric education in dental hygiene programs. Journal of Dental Education 62(4):319-324. [PubMed: 9603447]
  • U.S. Census Bureau. 2008. Statistical abstract of the United States: 2008 . Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  • VA (Veterans Adminstration). 2007. a. VA advanced fellowship in geriatrics . http://www​​/specialfellows/programs​/SF_AdvGeriatric.asp (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • VA. 2007. b. VA geriatric neurology . http://www​​/specialfellows/programs​/SF_GeriatricNeuro.asp (accessed December 5, 2007).
  • Waldrop, D. P., J. A. Fabiano, T. H. Nochajski, K. M. Zittel-Palamara, E. L. Davis, and L. J. Goldberg. 2006. More than a set of teeth: Assessing and enhancing dental students’ perceptions of older adults. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 27(1):37-56. [PubMed: 16873208]
  • Walsh-Burke, K., and E. L. Csikai. 2005. Professional social work education in end-of-life care: Contributions of the project on death in America’s social work leadership development program. Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care 1(2):11-26. [PubMed: 17387061]
  • Walton, S. M., K. K. Knapp, L. Miller, and G. T. Schumock. 2007. Examination of state-level changes in the pharmacist labor market using census data. Journal of the American Pharmacists Association 47(3):348-357. [PubMed: 17510029]
  • Warshaw, G. A., and E. J. Bragg. 2003. The training of geriatricians in the United States: Three decades of progress. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 51(7s):S338-S345. [PubMed: 12823665]
  • Warshaw, G. A., E. J. Bragg, R. W. Shaull, and C. J. Lindsell. 2002. Academic geriatric programs in U.S. allopathic and osteopathic medical schools. Journal of the American Medical Association 288(18):2313-2319. [PubMed: 12425709]
  • Warshaw, G. A., E. J. Bragg, D. C. Thomas, M. L. Ho, and D. E. Brewer. 2006. Are internal medicine residency programs adequately preparing physicians to care for the baby boomers? A national survey from the Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs Status of Geriatrics Workforce Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 54(10):1603-1609. [PubMed: 17038081]
  • Weeks, W. B., and A. E. Wallace. 2004. Return on educational investment in geriatrics training. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 52(11):1940-1945. [PubMed: 15507076]
  • Wendt, A. 2003. Mapping geriatric nursing competencies to the 2001 NCLEX-RN test plan. Nursing Outlook 51(4):152-157. [PubMed: 12949474]
  • Wheeler, B. K., S. Powelson, and J. H. Kim. 2007. Interdisciplinary clinical education: Implementing a gerontological home visiting program. Nurse Educator 32(3):136-140. [PubMed: 17496509]
  • Williams, B. C., T. L. Remington, M. A. Foulk, and A. L. Whall. 2006. Teaching interdisciplinary geriatrics ambulatory care: A case study. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 26(3):29-45. [PubMed: 16446270]
  • Williams, B. C., V. Weber, S. F. Babbott, L. M. Kirk, M. T. Heflin, E. O’Toole, M. M. Schapira, E. Eckstrom, A. Tulsky, A. M. Wolf, and S. Landefeld. 2007. Faculty development for the 21st century: Lessons from the Society of General Internal Medicine-Hartford Collaborative Centers for the care of older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 55(6):941-947. [PubMed: 17537098]
  • Wing, P., M. H. Langelier, E. S. Salsberg, and R. S. Hooker. 2004. The changing professional practice of physician assistants: 1992 to 2000. Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants 17(1):37-40, 42, 45. [PubMed: 15307336]
  • Wolf, S. L., H. X. Barnhart, N. G. Kutner, E. McNeely, C. Coogler, and T. Xu. 1996. Reducing frailty and falls in older persons: An investigation of Tai Chi and computerized balance training. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 44(5):489-497. [PubMed: 8617895]
  • Wood, G. J., and R. Mulligan. 2000. Cross-sectional comparison of dental students’ knowledge and attitudes before geriatric training: 1984-1999. Journal of Dental Education 64(11):763-771. [PubMed: 11191878]
  • Woolsey, L. J. 2005. Geriatric medicine and the future of the physician assistant profession. Perspective on Physician Assistant Education 16(1):24-28.
  • Woolsey, L. J. 2007. Physician assistant attitude and expressed intent to work with geriatric patients. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 28(1):61-78. [PubMed: 18032183]
  • Yeo, G. 2007. (unpublished). How will the U.S. health care system meet the challenge of the ethnogeriatric imperative? Paper commissioned by the IOM Committee on the Future Health Care Workforce for Older Americans.
  • Yuen, J. K., R. Breckman, R. D. Adelman, C. F. Capello, V. Lofaso, and M. Carrington Reid. 2006. Reflections of medical students on visiting chronically ill older patients in the home. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 54(11):1778-1783. [PubMed: 17087708]



While a physician who has extensive experience with elderly patients may specialize in geriatrics, the term “geriatrician” refers to a physician who has been certified in the subspecialty of geriatric medicine, or received a certificate of added qualifications in geriatric medicine.


Personal communication, T. Scott, American Society of Consultant Pharmacists, November 6, 2007.


Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008. HR 3043. 110th Congress. July 13, 2007.


In 2006, the ABIM recognized geriatric medicine as a subspecialty of internal medicine instead of as a CAQ (ABIM, 2006).


The ABPN dropped the term “of added qualifications” in 1997 (ABPN, 2007b).


Excluding clinical cardiac electrophysiology, critical care medicine, and geriatric medicine.


In this report, “professional nurses” refers to nurses who have graduated from an approved baccalaureate, associate degree, or diploma nursing program and who have passed a national licensing examination, the NCLEX-RNs.


In some states, this level of nurse is referred to as a licensed vocational nurse (LVN).


Nurse Reinvestment Act. Public Law 107-205. 107th Congress. August 1, 2002.


Nurse Education, Expansion, and Development Act of 2007. S 446. 110th Congress, 1st session. January 31, 2007.


There are insufficient data on transgendered older adults to include in this section.


All Payer Graduate Medical Education Act of 2001. HR 2178. 107th Congress. June 14, 2001.


Nurse Education, Expansion, and Development Act of 2007. S 446. 110th Congress, 1st session. January 31, 2007.


Nurse faculty and physical therapist education act of 2007. S 1628. 110th Congress, 1st session. June 14, 2007.


Geriatricians Loan Forgiveness Act of 2007. HR 2502. 110th Congress, 1st session. May 24, 2007.

Copyright 2008 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Bookshelf ID: NBK215402


  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (1.5M)

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...