Literature DB >> 31033599

"You Want Me to Assess What?": Faculty Perceptions of Assessing Residents From Outside Their Specialty.

Sarah Burm1, Stefanie S Sebok-Syer, Lorelei Lingard, Tamara VanHooren, Saad Chahine, Mark Goldszmidt, Christopher J Watling.   

Abstract

PROBLEM: Competency-based medical education (CBME) demands that residents be directly observed performing clinical tasks; however, many faculty lack assessment expertise, and some programs lack resources and faculty numbers to fulfill CBME's mandate. To maximize limited faculty resources, the authors explored training and deploying faculty to assess residents in specialties outside their own. APPROACH: In spring 2017, 10 MD and 2 PhD assessors at a medium-sized medical school in Ontario, Canada, participated in a 4-hour training session, which focused on providing formative assessments of patient handover, a core competency of medical practice. Assessors were deployed to 2 clinical settings outside their own specialty-critical care and pediatrics-each completing 11 to 26 assessments of residents delivering patient handover. Assessors were subsequently interviewed regarding their experiences. OUTCOMES: While assessors felt able to judge handover performance outside their specialty, their sense of comfort varied with their own prior experiences in the given settings. Lack of familiarity with the process of handover in a specific setting directly influenced assessors' perceptions of their own credibility. Although assessors identified the potential benefits of cross-specialty assessment, they also cited challenges to sustaining this approach. NEXT STEPS: Findings indicate a possible "contextual threshold" for cross-specialty assessment: tasks with high context specificity might not be suitable for cross-specialty assessment. Introducing higher-fidelity simulation into the training protocol and ensuring faculty members are remunerated for their time are necessary to establish future opportunities for shared assessment resources across training programs.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31033599     DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002771

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  2 in total

1.  Concordance of Narrative Comments with Supervision Ratings Provided During Entrustable Professional Activity Assessments.

Authors:  Andrew S Parsons; Kelley Mark; James R Martindale; Megan J Bray; Ryan P Smith; Elizabeth Bradley; Maryellen Gusic
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 6.473

2.  Are we generating more assessments without added value? Surgical trainees' perceptions of and receptiveness to cross-specialty assessment.

Authors:  Sarah Burm; Stefanie S Sebok-Syer; Julie Ann Van Koughnett; Christopher J Watling
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2020-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.