Challenging the Medical Residency Matching System through Antitrust Litigation

It is no secret that medical residencies are tremendously challenging positions.Being a resident physician often means long, grueling hours of patient care, a relatively small salary for the hours worked, and a steep learning curve of training and education under the scrutinizing eyes of seasoned physicians and fellow residents.The process for securing a residency is no leisurely stroll, either.Participation in the National Resident Match Program (NRMP), also known as "the match," is a competitive endeavor in which medical students vie for a coveted residency placement at one of several institutions of their choice; their ranked selections are factored against the choices of those institutions by an automated algorithm that makes the final determination.Although most medical school graduates accept that participating in the match and a residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) is the only way to become a licensed physician, a small group of physicians sought to challenge this system through legal action starting in 2002 with Jung v. Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)-a case that ultimately led to the legal solidification of this system for the foreseeable future [1]

Business · Matching (statistics · Medical education · Pathology · Business Law and Ethics · Healthcare Policy and Management · Medicine