Jesse M Pines1,2, Sukayna Alfaraj1,2,3, Sonal Batra1, Caitlin Carter2, Nisha Manikoth4, Colleen N Roche1, James Scott1, Ellen F Goldman5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences Washington DC. 2. Center for Healthcare Innovation & Policy Research George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences Washington DC. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Dammam Saudi Arabia. 4. Center for Faculty Excellence George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences Washington DC. 5. Department of Human and Organizational learning Graduate School of Education and Human Development George Washington University Washington DC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We explore attributes, traits, background, skills, and behavioral factors important to top clinical performance in emergency medicine (EM) residency. METHODS: We used a two-step process-an ideation survey with the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors and a modified Delphi technique-to identify: 1) factors important to top performance, 2) preresidency factors that predict it, and 3) the best ways to measure it. In the Delphi, six expert educators in emergency care assessed the presence of the factors from the ideation survey results in their top clinical performers. Consensus on important factors that were exemplified in >60% of top performers were retained in three Delphi rounds as well as predictors and measures of top performance. RESULTS: The ideation survey generated 81 responses with ideas for each factor. These were combined into 89 separate factors in seven categories: attributes, personal traits, emergency department (ED)-specific skills and behaviors, general skill set, background, preresidency predictors, and ways to measure top performance. After three Delphi rounds, the panel achieved consensus on 20 factors important to top clinical performance. This included two attributes, seven traits, one general skill set, and 10 ED-specific skills and behaviors. Interview performance was considered the sole important preresidency predictor and clinical competency committee results the sole important measure of top performance. CONCLUSION: Our expert panel identified 20 factors important to top clinical performance in EM residency. Future work is needed to further explore how individuals learn and develop these factors.
OBJECTIVES: We explore attributes, traits, background, skills, and behavioral factors important to top clinical performance in emergency medicine (EM) residency. METHODS: We used a two-step process-an ideation survey with the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors and a modified Delphi technique-to identify: 1) factors important to top performance, 2) preresidency factors that predict it, and 3) the best ways to measure it. In the Delphi, six expert educators in emergency care assessed the presence of the factors from the ideation survey results in their top clinical performers. Consensus on important factors that were exemplified in >60% of top performers were retained in three Delphi rounds as well as predictors and measures of top performance. RESULTS: The ideation survey generated 81 responses with ideas for each factor. These were combined into 89 separate factors in seven categories: attributes, personal traits, emergency department (ED)-specific skills and behaviors, general skill set, background, preresidency predictors, and ways to measure top performance. After three Delphi rounds, the panel achieved consensus on 20 factors important to top clinical performance. This included two attributes, seven traits, one general skill set, and 10 ED-specific skills and behaviors. Interview performance was considered the sole important preresidency predictor and clinical competency committee results the sole important measure of top performance. CONCLUSION: Our expert panel identified 20 factors important to top clinical performance in EM residency. Future work is needed to further explore how individuals learn and develop these factors.
Authors: Jesse M Pines; Joshua A Hilton; Ellen J Weber; Annechien J Alkemade; Hasan Al Shabanah; Philip D Anderson; Michael Bernhard; Alessio Bertini; André Gries; Santiago Ferrandiz; Vijaya Arun Kumar; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Barbara Hogan; Bo Madsen; Suzanne Mason; Gunnar Ohlén; Timothy Rainer; Niels Rathlev; Eric Revue; Drew Richardson; Mehdi Sattarian; Michael J Schull Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Jesse M Pines; Gaetano R Lotrecchiano; Mark S Zocchi; Danielle Lazar; Jacob B Leedekerken; Gregg S Margolis; Brendan G Carr Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Paul F Wimmers; Ted A W Splinter; Gregory R Hancock; Henk G Schmidt Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2006-07-18 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: Michael S Beeson; Wallace A Carter; Theodore A Christopher; Jonathan W Heidt; James H Jones; Lynne E Meyer; Susan B Promes; Kevin G Rodgers; Philip H Shayne; Susan R Swing; Mary Jo Wagner Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Robbert J Duvivier; Jan van Dalen; Arno M Muijtjens; Véronique R M P Moulaert; Cees P M van der Vleuten; Albert J J A Scherpbier Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Jaime Jordan; Laura R Hopson; Caroline Molins; Suzanne K Bentley; Nicole M Deiorio; Sally A Santen; Lalena M Yarris; Wendy C Coates; Michael A Gisondi Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2021-08-01
Authors: Ryan F Coughlin; Alina Tsyrulnik; Michael Gottlieb; Jessica Bod; Ryan Barnicle; James Dziura; David Della-Giustina; Katja Goldflam Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2022-09-17
Authors: Stefanie S Sebok-Syer; Lisa Shepherd; Allison McConnell; Adam M Dukelow; Robert Sedran; Lorelei Lingard Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2020-08-09