Karen E Hauer1, Benjamin Chesluk, William Iobst, Eric Holmboe, Robert B Baron, Christy K Boscardin, Olle Ten Cate, Patricia S O'Sullivan. 1. K.E. Hauer is professor, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. B. Chesluk is clinical research associate, Evaluation, Research, and Development, American Board of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. W. Iobst is vice president for academic and clinical affairs and vice dean, Commonwealth Medical College, Scranton, Pennsylvania. E. Holmboe is senior vice president, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Chicago, Illinois, and adjunct professor of medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. R.B. Baron is professor of medicine and associate dean for graduate and continuing medical education, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. C.K. Boscardin is associate professor, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. O. ten Cate is professor of medical education and director, Center for Research and Development of Education, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. P.S. O'Sullivan is professor of medicine and director of research and development in medical education, Office of Medical Education, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical competency committees (CCCs) are now required in graduate medical education. This study examined how residency programs understand and operationalize this mandate for resident performance review. METHOD: In 2013, the investigators conducted semistructured interviews with 34 residency program directors at five public institutions in California, asking about each institution's CCCs and resident performance review processes. They used conventional content analysis to identify major themes from the verbatim interview transcripts. RESULTS: The purpose of resident performance review at all institutions was oriented toward one of two paradigms: a problem identification model, which predominated; or a developmental model. The problem identification model, which focused on identifying and addressing performance concerns, used performance data such as red-flag alerts and informal information shared with program directors to identify struggling residents.In the developmental model, the timely acquisition and synthesis of data to inform each resident's developmental trajectory was challenging. Participants highly valued CCC members' expertise as educators to corroborate the identification of struggling residents and to enhance credibility of the committee's outcomes. Training in applying the milestones to the CCC's work was minimal.Participants were highly committed to performance review and perceived the current process as adequate for struggling residents but potentially not for others. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions orient resident performance review toward problem identification; a developmental approach is uncommon. Clarifying the purpose of resident performance review and employing efficient information systems that synthesize performance data and engage residents and faculty in purposeful feedback discussions could enable the meaningful implementation of milestones-based assessment.
PURPOSE: Clinical competency committees (CCCs) are now required in graduate medical education. This study examined how residency programs understand and operationalize this mandate for resident performance review. METHOD: In 2013, the investigators conducted semistructured interviews with 34 residency program directors at five public institutions in California, asking about each institution's CCCs and resident performance review processes. They used conventional content analysis to identify major themes from the verbatim interview transcripts. RESULTS: The purpose of resident performance review at all institutions was oriented toward one of two paradigms: a problem identification model, which predominated; or a developmental model. The problem identification model, which focused on identifying and addressing performance concerns, used performance data such as red-flag alerts and informal information shared with program directors to identify struggling residents.In the developmental model, the timely acquisition and synthesis of data to inform each resident's developmental trajectory was challenging. Participants highly valued CCC members' expertise as educators to corroborate the identification of struggling residents and to enhance credibility of the committee's outcomes. Training in applying the milestones to the CCC's work was minimal.Participants were highly committed to performance review and perceived the current process as adequate for struggling residents but potentially not for others. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions orient resident performance review toward problem identification; a developmental approach is uncommon. Clarifying the purpose of resident performance review and employing efficient information systems that synthesize performance data and engage residents and faculty in purposeful feedback discussions could enable the meaningful implementation of milestones-based assessment.
Authors: Karen E Hauer; Olle Ten Cate; Christy K Boscardin; William Iobst; Eric S Holmboe; Benjamin Chesluk; Robert B Baron; Patricia S O'Sullivan Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2016-05
Authors: Marrigje E Duitsman; Irene A Slootweg; Imke C van der Marel; Marianne Ten Kate-Booij; Jacqueline de Graaf; Cornelia Fluit; Debbie Jaarsma Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2019-08
Authors: Daniel J Schumacher; Beth King; Michelle M Barnes; Sean P Elliott; Kathleen Gibbs; Jon F McGreevy; Javier Gonzalez Del Rey; Tanvi Sharma; Catherine Michelson; Alan Schwartz Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2018-08
Authors: Natasha Chida; Christopher Brown; Jyoti Mathad; Kelly Carpenter; George Nelson; Marcos C Schechter; Paulina A Rebolledo; Valeria Fabre; Diana Silva Cantillo; Sarah Longworth; Valerianna Amorosa; Christian Petrauskis; Catherine Boulanger; Natalie Cain; Amita Gupta; Jane McKenzie-White; Robert Bollinger; Michael Melia Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2018-06
Authors: Cristen P Page; Alfred Reid; Catherine L Coe; Martha Carlough; Daryl Rosenbaum; Janalynn Beste; Blake Fagan; Erika Steinbacher; Geoffrey Jones; Warren P Newton Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2016-10
Authors: Brent Thoma; Andrew K Hall; Kevin Clark; Nazanin Meshkat; Warren J Cheung; Pierre Desaulniers; Cheryl Ffrench; Allison Meiwald; Christine Meyers; Catherine Patocka; Lorri Beatty; Teresa M Chan Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-08