Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-25 (1040873)

Clipboard (0)

Related Articles

1.  Implementing the 2009 Institute of Medicine recommendations on resident physician work hours, supervision, and safety 
Long working hours and sleep deprivation have been a facet of physician training in the US since the advent of the modern residency system. However, the scientific evidence linking fatigue with deficits in human performance, accidents and errors in industries from aeronautics to medicine, nuclear power, and transportation has mounted over the last 40 years. This evidence has also spawned regulations to help ensure public safety across safety-sensitive industries, with the notable exception of medicine.
In late 2007, at the behest of the US Congress, the Institute of Medicine embarked on a year-long examination of the scientific evidence linking resident physician sleep deprivation with clinical performance deficits and medical errors. The Institute of Medicine’s report, entitled “Resident duty hours: Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety”, published in January 2009, recommended new limits on resident physician work hours and workload, increased supervision, a heightened focus on resident physician safety, training in structured handovers and quality improvement, more rigorous external oversight of work hours and other aspects of residency training, and the identification of expanded funding sources necessary to implement the recommended reforms successfully and protect the public and resident physicians themselves from preventable harm.
Given that resident physicians comprise almost a quarter of all physicians who work in hospitals, and that taxpayers, through Medicare and Medicaid, fund graduate medical education, the public has a deep investment in physician training. Patients expect to receive safe, high-quality care in the nation’s teaching hospitals. Because it is their safety that is at issue, their voices should be central in policy decisions affecting patient safety. It is likewise important to integrate the perspectives of resident physicians, policy makers, and other constituencies in designing new policies. However, since its release, discussion of the Institute of Medicine report has been largely confined to the medical education community, led by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).
To begin gathering these perspectives and developing a plan to implement safer work hours for resident physicians, a conference entitled “Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety: What will it take to implement the Institute of Medicine recommendations?” was held at Harvard Medical School on June 17–18, 2010. This White Paper is a product of a diverse group of 26 representative stakeholders bringing relevant new information and innovative practices to bear on a critical patient safety problem. Given that our conference included experts from across disciplines with diverse perspectives and interests, not every recommendation was endorsed by each invited conference participant. However, every recommendation made here was endorsed by the majority of the group, and many were endorsed unanimously. Conference members participated in the process, reviewed the final product, and provided input before publication. Participants provided their individual perspectives, which do not necessarily represent the formal views of any organization.
In September 2010 the ACGME issued new rules to go into effect on July 1, 2011. Unfortunately, they stop considerably short of the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations and those endorsed by this conference. In particular, the ACGME only applied the limitation of 16 hours to first-year resident physicans. Thus, it is clear that policymakers, hospital administrators, and residency program directors who wish to implement safer health care systems must go far beyond what the ACGME will require. We hope this White Paper will serve as a guide and provide encouragement for that effort.
Resident physician workload and supervision
By the end of training, a resident physician should be able to practice independently. Yet much of resident physicians’ time is dominated by tasks with little educational value. The caseload can be so great that inadequate reflective time is left for learning based on clinical experiences. In addition, supervision is often vaguely defined and discontinuous. Medical malpractice data indicate that resident physicians are frequently named in lawsuits, most often for lack of supervision. The recommendations are: The ACGME should adjust resident physicians workload requirements to optimize educational value. Resident physicians as well as faculty should be involved in work redesign that eliminates nonessential and noneducational activity from resident physician dutiesMechanisms should be developed for identifying in real time when a resident physician’s workload is excessive, and processes developed to activate additional providersTeamwork should be actively encouraged in delivery of patient care. Historically, much of medical training has focused on individual knowledge, skills, and responsibility. As health care delivery has become more complex, it will be essential to train resident and attending physicians in effective teamwork that emphasizes collective responsibility for patient care and recognizes the signs, both individual and systemic, of a schedule and working conditions that are too demanding to be safeHospitals should embrace the opportunities that resident physician training redesign offers. Hospitals should recognize and act on the potential benefits of work redesign, eg, increased efficiency, reduced costs, improved quality of care, and resident physician and attending job satisfactionAttending physicians should supervise all hospital admissions. Resident physicians should directly discuss all admissions with attending physicians. Attending physicians should be both cognizant of and have input into the care patients are to receive upon admission to the hospitalInhouse supervision should be required for all critical care services, including emergency rooms, intensive care units, and trauma services. Resident physicians should not be left unsupervised to care for critically ill patients. In settings in which the acuity is high, physicians who have completed residency should provide direct supervision for resident physicians. Supervising physicians should always be physically in the hospital for supervision of resident physicians who care for critically ill patientsThe ACGME should explicitly define “good” supervision by specialty and by year of training. Explicit requirements for intensity and level of training for supervision of specific clinical scenarios should be providedCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) should use graduate medical education funding to provide incentives to programs with proven, effective levels of supervision. Although this action would require federal legislation, reimbursement rules would help to ensure that hospitals pay attention to the importance of good supervision and require it from their training programs
Resident physician work hours
Although the IOM “Sleep, supervision and safety” report provides a comprehensive review and discussion of all aspects of graduate medical education training, the report’s focal point is its recommendations regarding the hours that resident physicians are currently required to work. A considerable body of scientific evidence, much of it cited by the Institute of Medicine report, describes deteriorating performance in fatigued humans, as well as specific studies on resident physician fatigue and preventable medical errors.
The question before this conference was what work redesign and cultural changes are needed to reform work hours as recommended by the Institute of Medicine’s evidence-based report? Extensive scientific data demonstrate that shifts exceeding 12–16 hours without sleep are unsafe. Several principles should be followed in efforts to reduce consecutive hours below this level and achieve safer work schedules. The recommendations are: Limit resident physician work hours to 12–16 hour maximum shiftsA minimum of 10 hours off duty should be scheduled between shiftsResident physician input into work redesign should be actively solicitedSchedules should be designed that adhere to principles of sleep and circadian science; this includes careful consideration of the effects of multiple consecutive night shifts, and provision of adequate time off after night work, as specified in the IOM reportResident physicians should not be scheduled up to the maximum permissible limits; emergencies frequently occur that require resident physicians to stay longer than their scheduled shifts, and this should be anticipated in scheduling resident physicians’ work shiftsHospitals should anticipate the need for iterative improvement as new schedules are initiated; be prepared to learn from the initial phase-in, and change the plan as neededAs resident physician work hours are redesigned, attending physicians should also be considered; a potential consequence of resident physician work hour reduction and increased supervisory requirements may be an increase in work for attending physicians; this should be carefully monitored, and adjustments to attending physician work schedules made as needed to prevent unsafe work hours or working conditions for this group“Home call” should be brought under the overall limits of working hours; work load and hours should be monitored in each residency program to ensure that resident physicians and fellows on home call are getting sufficient sleepMedicare funding for graduate medical education in each hospital should be linked with adherence to the Institute of Medicine limits on resident physician work hours
Moonlighting by resident physicians
The Institute of Medicine report recommended including external as well as internal moonlighting in working hour limits. The recommendation is: All moonlighting work hours should be included in the ACGME working hour limits and actively monitored. Hospitals should formalize a moonlighting policy and establish systems for actively monitoring resident physician moonlighting
Safety of resident physicians
The “Sleep, supervision and safety” report also addresses fatigue-related harm done to resident physicians themselves. The report focuses on two main sources of physical injury to resident physicians impaired by fatigue, ie, needle-stick exposure to blood-borne pathogens and motor vehicle crashes. Providing safe transportation home for resident physicians is a logistical and financial challenge for hospitals. Educating physicians at all levels on the dangers of fatigue is clearly required to change driving behavior so that safe hospital-funded transport home is used effectively. Fatigue-related injury prevention (including not driving while drowsy) should be taught in medical school and during residency, and reinforced with attending physicians; hospitals and residency programs must be informed that resident physicians’ ability to judge their own level of impairment is impaired when they are sleep deprived; hence, leaving decisions about the capacity to drive to impaired resident physicians is not recommendedHospitals should provide transportation to all resident physicians who report feeling too tired to drive safely; in addition, although consecutive work should not exceed 16 hours, hospitals should provide transportation for all resident physicians who, because of unforeseen reasons or emergencies, work for longer than consecutive 24 hours; transportation under these circumstances should be automatically provided to house staff, and should not rely on self-identification or request
Training in effective handovers and quality improvement
Handover practice for resident physicians, attendings, and other health care providers has long been identified as a weak link in patient safety throughout health care settings. Policies to improve handovers of care must be tailored to fit the appropriate clinical scenario, recognizing that information overload can also be a problem. At the heart of improving handovers is the organizational effort to improve quality, an effort in which resident physicians have typically been insufficiently engaged. The recommendations are: Hospitals should train attending and resident physicians in effective handovers of careHospitals should create uniform processes for handovers that are tailored to meet each clinical setting; all handovers should be done verbally and face-to-face, but should also utilize written toolsWhen possible, hospitals should integrate hand-over tools into their electronic medical records (EMR) systems; these systems should be standardized to the extent possible across residency programs in a hospital, but may be tailored to the needs of specific programs and services; federal government should help subsidize adoption of electronic medical records by hospitals to improve signoutWhen feasible, handovers should be a team effort including nurses, patients, and familiesHospitals should include residents in their quality improvement and patient safety efforts; the ACGME should specify in their core competency requirements that resident physicians work on quality improvement projects; likewise, the Joint Commission should require that resident physicians be included in quality improvement and patient safety programs at teaching hospitals; hospital administrators and residency program directors should create opportunities for resident physicians to become involved in ongoing quality improvement projects and root cause analysis teams; feedback on successful quality improvement interventions should be shared with resident physicians and broadly disseminatedQuality improvement/patient safety concepts should be integral to the medical school curriculum; medical school deans should elevate the topics of patient safety, quality improvement, and teamwork; these concepts should be integrated throughout the medical school curriculum and reinforced throughout residency; mastery of these concepts by medical students should be tested on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) stepsFederal government should support involvement of resident physicians in quality improvement efforts; initiatives to improve quality by including resident physicians in quality improvement projects should be financially supported by the Department of Health and Human Services
Monitoring and oversight of the ACGME
While the ACGME is a key stakeholder in residency training, external voices are essential to ensure that public interests are heard in the development and monitoring of standards. Consequently, the Institute of Medicine report recommended external oversight and monitoring through the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The recommendations are: Make comprehensive fatigue management a Joint Commission National Patient Safety Goal; fatigue is a safety concern not only for resident physicians, but also for nurses, attending physicians, and other health care workers; the Joint Commission should seek to ensure that all health care workers, not just resident physicians, are working as safely as possibleFederal government, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, should encourage development of comprehensive fatigue management programs which all health systems would eventually be required to implementMake ACGME compliance with working hours a “ condition of participation” for reimbursement of direct and indirect graduate medical education costs; financial incentives will greatly increase the adoption of and compliance with ACGME standards
Future financial support for implementation
The Institute of Medicine’s report estimates that $1.7 billion (in 2008 dollars) would be needed to implement its recommendations. Twenty-five percent of that amount ($376 million) will be required just to bring hospitals into compliance with the existing 2003 ACGME rules. Downstream savings to the health care system could potentially result from safer care, but these benefits typically do not accrue to hospitals and residency programs, who have been asked historically to bear the burden of residency reform costs. The recommendations are: The Institute of Medicine should convene a panel of stakeholders, including private and public funders of health care and graduate medical education, to lay down the concrete steps necessary to identify and allocate the resources needed to implement the recommendations contained in the IOM “Resident duty hours: Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety” report. Conference participants suggested several approaches to engage public and private support for this initiativeEfforts to find additional funding to implement the Institute of Medicine recommendations should focus more broadly on patient safety and health care delivery reform; policy efforts focused narrowly upon resident physician work hours are less likely to succeed than broad patient safety initiatives that include residency redesign as a key componentHospitals should view the Institute of Medicine recommendations as an opportunity to begin resident physician work redesign projects as the core of a business model that embraces safety and ultimately saves resourcesBoth the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should take the Institute of Medicine recommendations into consideration when promulgating rules for innovation grantsThe National Health Care Workforce Commission should consider the Institute of Medicine recommendations when analyzing the nation’s physician workforce needs
Recommendations for future research
Conference participants concurred that convening the stakeholders and agreeing on a research agenda was key. Some observed that some sectors within the medical education community have been reluctant to act on the data. Several logical funders for future research were identified. But above all agencies, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is the only stakeholder that funds graduate medical education upstream and will reap savings downstream if preventable medical errors are reduced as a result of reform of resident physician work hours.
PMCID: PMC3630963  PMID: 23616719
resident; hospital; working hours; safety
2.  Impact on house staff evaluation scores when changing from a Dreyfus- to a Milestone-based evaluation model: one internal medicine residency program's findings 
Medical Education Online  2014;19:10.3402/meo.v19.25185.
As graduate medical education (GME) moves into the Next Accreditation System (NAS), programs must take a critical look at their current models of evaluation and assess how well they align with reporting outcomes. Our objective was to assess the impact on house staff evaluation scores when transitioning from a Dreyfus-based model of evaluation to a Milestone-based model of evaluation. Milestones are a key component of the NAS.
We analyzed all end of rotation evaluations of house staff completed by faculty for academic years 2010–2011 (pre-Dreyfus model) and 2011–2012 (post-Milestone model) in one large university-based internal medicine residency training program. Main measures included change in PGY-level average score; slope, range, and separation of average scores across all six Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies.
Transitioning from a Dreyfus-based model to a Milestone-based model resulted in a larger separation in the scores between our three post-graduate year classes, a steeper progression of scores in the PGY-1 class, a wider use of the 5-point scale on our global end of rotation evaluation form, and a downward shift in the PGY-1 scores and an upward shift in the PGY-3 scores.
For faculty trained in both models of assessment, the Milestone-based model had greater discriminatory ability as evidenced by the larger separation in the scores for all the classes, in particular the PGY-1 class.
PMCID: PMC4244322  PMID: 25425408
Medical Education-Graduate; Medical Education-assessment methods; Milestones; Next Accreditation System; ACGME core competencies
3.  The Pediatrics Milestones: Conceptual Framework, Guiding Principles, and Approach to Development 
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) have partnered to initiate the Pediatrics Milestone Project to further refine the 6 ACGME competencies and to set performance standards as part of the continued commitment to document outcomes of training and program effectiveness.
Members of the Pediatrics Milestone Project Working Group searched the medical literature and beyond to create a synopsis of models and evidence for a developmental ontogeny of the elements for 52 subcompetencies. For each subcompetency, we created a series of Milestones, grounded in the literature. The milestones were vetted with the entire working group, engaging in an iterative process of revisions until reaching consensus that their narrative descriptions (1) included all critical elements, (2) were behaviorally based, (3) were properly sequenced, and (4) represented the educational continuum of training and practice.
We have completed the first iteration of milestones for all subcompetencies. For each milestone, a synopsis of relevant literature provides background, references, and a conceptual framework. These milestones provide narrative descriptions of behaviors that represent the ontogeny of knowledge, skill, and attitude development across the educational continuum of training and practice.
The pediatrics milestones take us a step closer to meaningful outcome assessment. Next steps include undertaking rigorous study, making appropriate modifications, and setting performance standards. Our aim is to assist program directors in making more reliable and valid judgments as to whether a resident is a “good doctor” and to provide outcome evidence regarding the program's success in developing doctors.
PMCID: PMC2951782  PMID: 21976091
4.  Impact of subspecialty elective exposures on outcomes on the American board of internal medicine certification examination 
BMC Medical Education  2012;12:94.
The American Board of Internal Medicine Certification Examination (ABIM-CE) is one of several methods used to assess medical knowledge, an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competency for graduating internal medicine residents. With recent changes in graduate medical education program directors and internal medicine residents are seeking evidence to guide decisions regarding residency elective choices. Prior studies have shown that formalized elective curricula improve subspecialty ABIM-CE scores. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether the number of subspecialty elective exposures or the specific subspecialties which residents complete electives in impact ABIM-CE scores.
ABIM-CE scores, elective exposures and demographic characteristics were collected for MedStar Georgetown University Hospital internal medicine residents who were first-time takers of the ABIM-CE in 2006–2010 (n=152). Elective exposures were defined as a two-week period assigned to the respective subspecialty. ABIM-CE score was analyzed using the difference between the ABIM-CE score and the standardized passing score (delta-SPS). Subspecialty scores were analyzed using percentage of correct responses. Data was analyzed using GraphPad Prism version 5.00 for Windows.
Paired elective exposure and ABIM-CE scores were available in 131 residents. There was no linear correlation between ABIM-CE mean delta-SPS and the total number of electives or the number of unique elective exposures. Residents with ≤14 elective exposures had higher ABIM-CE mean delta-SPS than those with ≥15 elective exposures (143.4 compared to 129.7, p=0.051). Repeated electives in individual subspecialties were not associated with significant difference in mean ABIM-CE delta-SPS.
This study did not demonstrate significant positive associations between individual subspecialty elective exposures and ABIM-CE mean delta-SPS score. Residents with ≤14 elective exposures had higher ABIM-CE mean delta-SPS than those with ≥15 elective exposures suggesting there may be an “ideal” number of elective exposures that supports improved ABIM-CE performance. Repeated elective exposures in an individual specialty did not correlate with overall or subspecialty ABIM-CE performance.
PMCID: PMC3480921  PMID: 23057635
Resident education; Gender; Elective; Subspecialty; Graduate medical education
5.  Burnout and Distress Among Internal Medicine Program Directors: Results of A National Survey 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2013;28(8):1056-1063.
Physician burnout and distress has been described in national studies of practicing physicians, internal medicine (IM) residents, IM clerkship directors, and medical school deans. However, no comparable national data exist for IM residency program directors.
To assess burnout and distress among IM residency program directors, and to evaluate relationships of distress with personal and program characteristics and perceptions regarding implementation and consequences of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) regulations.
The 2010 Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) Annual Survey, developed by the APDIM Survey Committee, was sent in August 2010 to the 377 program directors with APDIM membership, representing 99.0 % of the 381 United States categorical IM residency programs.
The 2010 APDIM Annual Survey included validated items on well-being and distress, including questions addressing quality of life, satisfaction with work-life balance, and burnout. Questions addressing personal and program characteristics and perceptions regarding implementation and consequences of ACGME regulations were also included.
Of 377 eligible program directors, 282 (74.8 %) completed surveys. Among respondents, 12.4 % and 28.8 % rated their quality of life and satisfaction with work-life balance negatively, respectively. Also, 27.0 % reported emotional exhaustion, 10.4 % reported depersonalization, and 28.7 % reported overall burnout. These rates were lower than those reported previously in national studies of medical students, IM residents, practicing physicians, IM clerkship directors, and medical school deans. Aspects of distress were more common among younger program directors, women, and those reporting greater weekly work hours. Work–home conflicts were common and associated with all domains of distress, especially if not resolved in a manner effectively balancing work and home responsibilities. Associations with program characteristics such as program size and American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) pass rates were not found apart from higher rates of depersonalization among directors of community-based programs (23.5 % vs. 8.6 %, p = 0.01). We did not observe any consistent associations between distress and perceptions of implementation and consequences of program regulations.
The well-being of IM program directors across domains, including quality of life, satisfaction with work-life balance, and burnout, appears generally superior to that of medical trainees, practicing physicians, and other medical educators nationally. Additionally, it is reassuring that program directors' perceptions of their ability to respond to current regulatory requirements are not adversely associated with distress. However, the increased distress levels among younger program directors, women, and those at community-based training programs reported in this study are important concerns worthy of further study.
PMCID: PMC3710382  PMID: 23595924
graduate medical education; residency; burnout; well-being
6.  Early Feedback on the Use of the Internal Medicine Reporting Milestones in Assessment of Resident Performance 
The educational milestones were designed as a criterion-based framework for assessing resident progression on the 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies.
We obtained feedback on, and assessed the construct validity and perceived feasibility and utility of, draft Internal Medicine Milestones for Patient Care and Systems-Based Practice.
All participants in our mixed-methods study were members of competency committees in internal medicine residency programs. An initial survey assessed participant and program demographics; focus groups obtained feedback on the draft milestones and explored their perceived utility in resident assessment, and an exit survey elicited input on the value of the draft milestones in resident assessment. Surveys were tabulated using descriptive statistics. Conventional content analysis method was used to assess the focus group data.
Thirty-four participants from 17 programs completed surveys and participated in 1 of 6 focus groups. Overall, the milestones were perceived as useful in formative and summative assessment of residents. Participants raised concerns about the length and complexity of some draft milestones and suggested specific changes. The focus groups also identified a need for faculty development. In the exit survey, most participants agreed that the Patient Care and Systems-Based Practice Milestones would help competency committees assess trainee progress toward independent practice.
Draft reporting milestones for 2 competencies demonstrated significant construct validity in both the content and response process and the perceived utility for the assessment of resident performance. To ensure success, additional feedback from the internal medicine community and faculty development will be necessary.
PMCID: PMC3771173  PMID: 24404307
7.  Found in transition: applying milestones to three unique discharge curricula 
PeerJ  2015;3:e819.
Introduction. A safe and effective transition from hospital to post-acute care is a complex and important physician competency. Milestones and Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA) form the new educational rubric in Graduate Medical Education Training. “A safe and effective discharge from the hospital” is an EPA ripe for educational innovation.
Methods. The authors collaborated in a qualitative process called mapping to define 22 of 142 Internal Medicine (IM) curricular milestones related to the transition of care. Fifty-five participant units at an Association for Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) workshop prioritized the milestones, using a validated ranking process called Q-sort. We analyzed the Q-sort results, which rank the milestones in order of priority. We then applied this ranking to three innovative models of training IM residents in the transitions of care: Simulation (S), Discharge Clinic Feedback (DCF) and TRACER (T).
Results. We collected 55 Q-sort rankings from particpants at the APDIM workshop. We then identified which milestones are a focus of the three innovative models of training in the transition of care: Simulation = 5 of 22 milestones, Discharge Clinic Feedback = 9 of 22 milestones, and TRACER = 7 of 22 milestones. Milestones identified in each innovation related to one of the top 8 prioritized milestones 75% of the time; thus, more frequently than the milestones with lower priority. Two milestones are shared by all three curricula: Utilize patient-centered education and Ensure succinct written communication. Two other milestones are shared by two curricula: Manage and coordinate care transitions across multiple delivery systems and Customize care in the context of the patient’s preferences. If you combine the three innovations, all of the top 8 milestones are included.
Discussion. The milestones give us a context to share individual innovations and to compare and contrast using a standardized frame. We demonstrate that the three unique discharge curricula in aggregate capture all of the highest prioritized milestones for this discharge EPA.
PMCID: PMC4358664  PMID: 25780771
Transition of care; Milestones; Entrustable professional activities; Medical education; Discharge; Core competence
8.  Duty Hour Recommendations and Implications for Meeting the ACGME Core Competencies: Views of Residency Directors 
Mayo Clinic Proceedings  2011;86(3):185-191.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the views of residency program directors regarding the effect of the 2010 duty hour recommendations on the 6 core competencies of graduate medical education.
METHODS: US residency program directors in internal medicine, pediatrics, and general surgery were e-mailed a survey from July 8 through July 20, 2010, after the 2010 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour recommendations were published. Directors were asked to rate the implications of the new recommendations for the 6 ACGME core competencies as well as for continuity of inpatient care and resident fatigue.
RESULTS: Of 719 eligible program directors, 464 (65%) responded. Most program directors believe that the new ACGME recommendations will decrease residents' continuity with hospitalized patients (404/464 [87%]) and will not change (303/464 [65%]) or will increase (26/464 [6%]) resident fatigue. Additionally, most program directors (249-363/464 [53%-78%]) believe that the new duty hour restrictions will decrease residents' ability to develop competency in 5 of the 6 core areas. Surgery directors were more likely than internal medicine directors to believe that the ACGME recommendations will decrease residents' competency in patient care (odds ratio [OR], 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-6.3), medical knowledge (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2), practice-based learning and improvement (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.7-4.4), interpersonal and communication skills (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0), and professionalism (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0).
CONCLUSION: Residency program directors' reactions to ACGME duty hour recommendations demonstrate a marked degree of concern about educating a competent generation of future physicians in the face of increasing duty hour standards and regulation.
The reactions of residency program directors to the ACGME duty hour recommendations demonstrate a marked degree of concern about educating a competent generation of future physicians in the face of increasing duty hour standards and regulation.
PMCID: PMC3046937  PMID: 21307391
9.  Educational Milestone Development in the First 7 Specialties to Enter the Next Accreditation System 
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Outcome Project introduced 6 general competencies relevant to medical practice but fell short of its goal to create a robust assessment system that would allow program accreditation based on outcomes. In response, the ACGME, the specialty boards, and other stakeholders collaborated to develop educational milestones, observable steps in residents' professional development that describe progress from entry to graduation and beyond.
We summarize the development of the milestones, focusing on 7 specialties, moving to the next accreditation system in July 2013, and offer evidence of their validity.
Specialty workgroups with broad representation used a 5-level developmental framework and incorporated information from literature reviews, specialty curricula, dialogue with constituents, and pilot testing.
The workgroups produced richly diverse sets of milestones that reflect the community's consideration of attributes of competence relevant to practice in the given specialty. Both their development process and the milestones themselves establish a validity argument, when contemporary views of validity for complex performance assessment are used.
Initial evidence for validity emerges from the development processes and the resulting milestones. Further advancing a validity argument will require research on the use of milestone data in resident assessment and program accreditation.
PMCID: PMC3613328  PMID: 24404235
10.  Operationalizing the Internal Medicine Milestones–An Early Status Report 
The internal medicine milestones were developed to advance outcomes-based residency training and will play an important role in the next accreditation system.
As an element of our program's participation in the internal medicine educational innovations project, we implemented a milestones-based evaluation process in our general medicine and pulmonary-critical care rotations on July 1, 2010.
Outcomes assessed included survey-rated acceptability to participating faculty, residents, and clinical competency committee members.
Faculty and residents agreed that the milestones promoted a common understanding of what knowledge, skills, and attitudes should be displayed at particular points in residents' professional development and enhanced evaluators' ability to provide specific performance feedback. Most residents and faculty members agreed that the milestones promoted fairness and uniformity in the evaluation process. Clinical competency committee members agreed the milestones improved the quality of information available for deliberations and resulted in more uniform promotion standards. Faculty rated the use of too many milestones per form/tool at a mean of 7.3 (where 1 was minimally problematic, and 10 was maximally problematic) and the potential for evaluator fatigue (mean, 8.2) as the most significant challenges to the use of milestones. Eight of 12 faculty members would recommend milestones in other programs; 4 were uncertain.
Despite logistical challenges, educators and trainees found that milestones promoted a common understanding of what knowledge, skills and attitudes should be displayed at particular stages of training; permitted greater specificity in performance feedback; and enhanced uniformity and fairness in promotion decisions.
PMCID: PMC3613298  PMID: 24404240
11.  Clinical instructors' perception of a faculty development programme promoting postgraduate year-1 (PGY1) residents' ACGME six core competencies: a 2-year study 
BMJ Open  2011;1(2):e000200.
The six core competencies designated by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) are essential for establishing a patient centre holistic medical system. The authors developed a faculty programme to promote the postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) resident, ACGME six core competencies. The study aims to assess the clinical instructors' perception, attitudes and subjective impression towards the various sessions of the ‘faculty development programme for teaching ACGME competencies.’
During 2009 and 2010, 134 clinical instructors participated in the programme to establish their ability to teach and assess PGY1 residents about ACGME competencies.
The participants in the faculty development programme reported that the skills most often used while teaching were learnt during circuit and itinerant bedside, physical examination teaching, mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) evaluation demonstration, training workshop and videotapes of ‘how to teach ACGME competencies.’ Participants reported that circuit bedside teaching and mini-CEX evaluation demonstrations helped them in the interpersonal and communication skills domain, and that the itinerant teaching demonstrations helped them in the professionalism domain, while physical examination teaching and mini-CEX evaluation demonstrations helped them in the patients' care domain. Both the training workshop and videotape session increase familiarity with teaching and assessing skills. Participants who applied the skills learnt from the faculty development programme the most in their teaching and assessment came from internal medicine departments, were young attending physician and had experience as PGY1 clinical instructors.
According to the clinical instructors' response, our faculty development programme effectively increased their familiarity with various teaching and assessment skills needed to teach PGY1 residents and ACGME competencies, and these clinical instructors also then subsequently apply these skills.
Article summary
Article focus
In order to train PGY1 residents, we need to help clinical instructors to become familiar with the teaching and assessment skills that form the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education six core-competencies.
Our study used a self-reported questionnaires based analysis to evaluate the clinical instructors' perception to our faculty development programme.
Key messages
Participants reported that their most commonly used skills were learnt from itinerant and circuit bedside teaching, and mini-clinical evaluation exercise evaluation demonstration in our programme.
Participants also reported that the 40 h basic training course improved their abilities to train and assess PGY1 residents in patient care, interpersonal and communication skills, and medical knowledge domains whereas postcourse training workshop and videotape session enhanced their ability in system-based practice, practice-based learning and improvement, and professionalism domains.
A serial follow-up questionnaire suggested that the degree of participant application of skills learnt from our programme increased progressively after finishing the 40 h basic training course, the postcourse training workshop and videotape session.
Strengths and limitations of this study
According to the clinical instructors' responses, our programme effectively increased their familiarity with teaching and assessment skills needed when teaching PGY1 residents' Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies and that these skills were subsequently applies.
This study was limited by the fact that questionnaire used to track and assess the effectiveness of the training programme may have had information and recall bias. In addition, this study had a relatively small sample size and did not contain a control group. However, no controlled educational trials on this subject have been published as yet.
PMCID: PMC3225591  PMID: 22116089
12.  The State of Evaluation in Internal Medicine Residency 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2008;23(7):1010-1015.
There are no nationwide data on the methods residency programs are using to assess trainee competence. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has recommended tools that programs can use to evaluate their trainees. It is unknown if programs are adhering to these recommendations.
To describe evaluation methods used by our nation’s internal medicine residency programs and assess adherence to ACGME methodological recommendations for evaluation.
Nationwide survey.
All internal medicine programs registered with the Association of Program Directors of Internal Medicine (APDIM).
Descriptive statistics of programs and tools used to evaluate competence; compliance with ACGME recommended evaluative methods.
The response rate was 70%. Programs were using an average of 4.2–6.0 tools to evaluate their trainees with heavy reliance on rating forms. Direct observation and practice and data-based tools were used much less frequently. Most programs were using at least 1 of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)’s “most desirable” methods of evaluation for all 6 measures of trainee competence. These programs had higher support staff to resident ratios than programs using less desirable evaluative methods.
Residency programs are using a large number and variety of tools for evaluating the competence of their trainees. Most are complying with ACGME recommended methods of evaluation especially if the support staff to resident ratio is high.
PMCID: PMC2517950  PMID: 18612734
graduate medical education; residency; ACGME; competency
13.  A Pilot Curriculum to Integrate Community Health Into Internal Medicine Residency Training 
Public health training has become an important aspect of residency education. The Institute of Medicine recommends public health training for all resident physicians, and internal medicine educational milestones include general public health skills.
We sought to integrate community health into internal medicine residency training by developing a community health elective (CHE) curriculum.
We developed a 2-week CHE curriculum for internal medicine residents, featuring facilitated discussion sessions, clinical experience at health centers targeting medically underserved populations, and a culminating presentation. We evaluated our pilot curriculum using pre-elective and postelective course surveys with Likert-type questions.
Of 150 eligible residents, 32 (21%) enrolled in the elective. Nearly all participants (30 of 32, 94%) strongly agreed that learning about community health was an important part of their residency training. Residents' perceived competence at discharging hospital patients with follow-up at community health sites increased 13-fold after taking the elective (P < .001). There was no increase in reported likelihood to practice in an underserved community or in primary care.
The CHE addresses several Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies and internal medicine Milestones and could be a replicable model for internal medicine residency programs that seek to provide community health training.
PMCID: PMC3886472  PMID: 24455022
14.  Preparing medical students for obstetrics and gynecology milestone level one: a description of a pilot curriculum 
Medical Education Online  2014;19:10.3402/meo.v19.25746.
The implementation of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones in the field of obstetrics and gynecology has arrived with Milestones Level One defined as the level expected of an incoming first-year resident.
We designed, implemented, and evaluated a 4-week elective for fourth-year medical school students, which utilized a multimodal approach to teaching and assessing the Milestones Level One competencies.
The 78-hour curriculum utilized traditional didactic lectures, flipped classroom active learning sessions, a simulated paging curriculum, simulation training, embalmed cadaver anatomical dissections, and fresh-frozen cadaver operative procedures. We performed an assessment of student knowledge and surgical skills before and after completion of the course. Students also received feedback on their assessment and management of eight simulated paging scenarios. Students completed course content satisfaction surveys at the completion of each of the 4 weeks.
Students demonstrated improvement in knowledge and surgical skills at the completion of the course. Paging confidence trended toward improvement at the completion of the course. Student satisfaction was high for all of the course content, and the active learning components of the curriculum (flipped classroom, simulation, and anatomy sessions) had higher scores than the traditional didactics in all six categories of our student satisfaction survey.
This pilot study demonstrates a practical approach for preparing fourth-year medical students for the expectations of Milestones Level One in obstetrics and gynecology. This curriculum can serve as a framework as medical schools and specific specialties work to meet the first steps of the ACGME's Next Accreditation System.
PMCID: PMC4246035  PMID: 25430640
ACGME Milestones; flipped classroom; active learning
15.  The research rotation: competency-based structured and novel approach to research training of internal medicine residents 
In the United States, the Accreditation Council of graduate medical education (ACGME) requires all accredited Internal medicine residency training programs to facilitate resident scholarly activities. However, clinical experience and medical education still remain the main focus of graduate medical education in many Internal Medicine (IM) residency-training programs. Left to design the structure, process and outcome evaluation of the ACGME research requirement, residency-training programs are faced with numerous barriers. Many residency programs report having been cited by the ACGME residency review committee in IM for lack of scholarly activity by residents.
We would like to share our experience at Lincoln Hospital, an affiliate of Weill Medical College Cornell University New York, in designing and implementing a successful structured research curriculum based on ACGME competencies taught during a dedicated "research rotation".
Since the inception of the research rotation in 2004, participation of our residents among scholarly activities has substantially increased. Our residents increasingly believe and appreciate that research is an integral component of residency training and essential for practice of medicine.
Internal medicine residents' outlook in research can be significantly improved using a research curriculum offered through a structured and dedicated research rotation. This is exemplified by the improvement noted in resident satisfaction, their participation in scholarly activities and resident research outcomes since the inception of the research rotation in our internal medicine training program.
PMCID: PMC1630691  PMID: 17044924
16.  Entrustment and Mapping of Observable Practice Activities for Resident Assessment 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2014;29(8):1177-1182.
Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) and the Next Accreditation System reporting milestones reduce general competencies into smaller evaluable parts. However, some EPAs and reporting milestones may be too broad to use as direct assessment tools. We describe our internal medicine residency curriculum and assessment system, which uses entrustment and mapping of observable practice activities (OPAs) for resident assessment. We created discrete OPAs for each resident rotation and learning experience. In combination, these serve as curricular foundation and tools for assessment. OPA performance is measured via a 5-point entrustment scale, and mapped to milestones and EPAs. Entrustment ratings of OPAs provide an opportunity for immediate structured feedback of specific clinical skills, and mapping OPAs to milestones and EPAs can be used for longitudinal assessment, promotion decisions, and reporting. Direct assessment and demonstration of progressive entrustment of trainee skill over time are important goals for all training programs. Systems that use OPAs mapped to milestones and EPAs provide the opportunity for achieving both, but require validation.
PMCID: PMC4099463  PMID: 24557518
resident assessment; milestones; entrustable professional activities; medical education
17.  Incorporating Evidence-based Medicine into Resident Education: A CORD Survey of Faculty and Resident Expectations 
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) invokes evidence-based medicine (EBM) principles through the practice-based learning core competency. The authors hypothesized that among a representative sample of emergency medicine (EM) residency programs, a wide variability in EBM resident training priorities, faculty expertise expectations, and curricula exists.
The primary objective was to obtain descriptive data regarding EBM practices and expectations from EM physician educators. Our secondary objective was to assess differences in EBM educational priorities among journal club directors compared with non–journal club directors.
A 19-question survey was developed by a group of recognized EBM curriculum innovators and then disseminated to Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) conference participants, assessing their opinions regarding essential EBM skill sets and EBM curricular expectations for residents and faculty at their home institutions. The survey instrument also identified the degree of interest respondents had in receiving a free monthly EBM journal club curriculum.
A total of 157 individuals registered for the conference, and 98 completed the survey. Seventy-seven (77% of respondents) were either residency program directors or assistant / associate program directors. The majority of participants were from university-based programs and in practice at least 5 years. Respondents reported the ability to identify flawed research (45%), apply research findings to patient care (43%), and comprehend research methodology (33%) as the most important resident skill sets. The majority of respondents reported no formal journal club or EBM curricula (75%) and do not utilize structured critical appraisal instruments (71%) when reviewing the literature. While journal club directors believed that resident learners’ most important EBM skill is to identify secondary peer-reviewed resources, non–journal club directors identified residents’ ability to distinguish significantly flawed research as the key skill to develop. Interest in receiving a free monthly EBM journal club curriculum was widely accepted (89%).
Attaining EBM proficiency is an expected outcome of graduate medical education (GME) training, although the specific domains of anticipated expertise differ between faculty and residents. Few respondents currently use a formalized curriculum to guide the development of EBM skill sets. There appears to be a high level of interest in obtaining EBM journal club educational content in a structured format. Measuring the effects of providing journal club curriculum content in conjunction with other EBM interventions may warrant further investigation.
PMCID: PMC3219923  PMID: 21199085
evidence-based medicine; knowledge translation; faculty development
18.  A Qualitative Study of Improving Preceptor Feedback Delivery on Professionalism to Postgraduate Year 1 Residents Through Education, Observation, and Reflection 
The Ochsner Journal  2013;13(3):322-326.
To better standardize the teaching of professionalism, the American Board of Internal Medicine and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education established competency-based training milestones for internal medicine residency programs. Accordingly, professionalism milestones served as the basis for a faculty development program centered on providing feedback to postgraduate year 1 residents (interns) on their own professionalism behaviors during preceptor-resident sessions in the internal medicine continuity clinic.
To determine the level of faculty (n=8) understanding and comfort in providing feedback, surveys listing 12-month professionalism milestones were distributed to core internal medicine teaching faculty. Current interns (n=10) also rated their understanding of the same milestones. The faculty development program included interpersonal communication education, role-plays of difficult situations, and pocket resources, as well as direct feedback on videotaped sessions with residents. At the end of the intervention period, participating faculty completed a postdevelopment survey, and the current 6-month interns completed a follow-up assessment.
Average ratings between the pre- and postintervention teaching faculty surveys fell approximately 0.25%-0.50% on all measures of understanding, but increased slightly on measures of comfort. Conversely, average ratings between the pre- and postintervention 6-month intern surveys generally increased 0.25%-0.50% for measures of comfort and understanding.
The faculty perceived the intervention as helpful in teaching them to focus on behaviors that change the context of overall feedback delivery. However, the study results showed that the system in place was not conducive to implementing such a program without modification and the introduction of resources.
PMCID: PMC3776506  PMID: 24052760
Graduate medical education; quality improvement
19.  The “Zing Factor”—How Do Faculty Describe the Best Pediatrics Residents? 
Faculty in graduate medical education programs may not have uniform approaches to differentiating the quality of residents, and reviews of evaluations suggest that faculty use different standards when assessing residents. Standards for assessing residents also do not consistently map to items on evaluation forms. One way to improve assessment is to reach consensus on the traits and behaviors that are (or should be) present in the best residents.
A trained interviewer conducted semistructured interviews with faculty affiliated with 2 pediatrics residency programs until content saturation was achieved. Interviewees were asked to describe specific traits present in residents they identify as the best. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. We used an iterative, inductive approach to generate a coding scheme and identify common themes.
From 23 interviews, we identified 7 thematic categories of traits and behaviors: personality, energy, professionalism, team behaviors, self-improvement behaviors, patient-interaction behaviors, and medical knowledge and clinical skills (including a subcategory, knowledge integration). Most faculty interviewees focused on traits like passion, enthusiasm, maturity, and reliability. Examination score or intelligence was mentioned less frequently than traits and behaviors categorized under personality and professionalism.
Faculty identified many traits and behaviors in the residents they define as the best. The thematic categories had incomplete overlap with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and CanMEDS competencies. This research highlights the ongoing need to review our assessment strategies, and may have implications for the ACGME Milestone Project.
PMCID: PMC3963764  PMID: 24701319
20.  Narrative descriptions should replace grades and numerical ratings for clinical performance in medical education in the United States 
Background: In medical education, evaluation of clinical performance is based almost universally on rating scales for defined aspects of performance and scores on examinations and checklists. Unfortunately, scores and grades do not capture progress and competence among learners in the complex tasks and roles required to practice medicine. While the literature suggests serious problems with the validity and reliability of ratings of clinical performance based on numerical scores, the critical issue is not that judgments about what is observed vary from rater to rater but that these judgments are lost when translated into numbers on a scale. As the Next Accreditation System of the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) takes effect, medical educators have an opportunity to create new processes of evaluation to document and facilitate progress of medical learners in the required areas of competence.
Proposal and initial experience: Narrative descriptions of learner performance in the clinical environment, gathered using a framework for observation that builds a shared understanding of competence among the faculty, promise to provide meaningful qualitative data closely linked to the work of physicians. With descriptions grouped in categories and matched to milestones, core faculty can place each learner along the milestones' continua of progress. This provides the foundation for meaningful feedback to facilitate the progress of each learner as well as documentation of progress toward competence.
Implications: This narrative evaluation system addresses educational needs as well as the goals of the Next Accreditation System for explicitly documented progress. Educators at other levels of education and in other professions experience similar needs for authentic assessment and, with meaningful frameworks that describe roles and tasks, may also find useful a system built on descriptions of learner performance in actual work settings.
Conclusions: We must place medical learning and assessment in the contexts and domains in which learners do clinical work. The approach proposed here for gathering qualitative performance data in different contexts and domains is one step along the road to moving learners toward competence and mastery.
PMCID: PMC3836691  PMID: 24348433
medical education; assessment; evaluation; narrative; milestones; competence; observation
21.  Training Internists to Meet Critical Care Needs in the United States: A Consensus Statement from the Critical Care Societies Collaborative (CCSC) 
Critical care medicine  2014;42(5):1272-1279.
Multiple training pathways are recognized by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) for internal medicine (IM) physicians to certify in critical care medicine (CCM) via the American Board of Internal Medicine. While each involves 1 year of clinical fellowship training in CCM, substantive differences in training requirements exist among the various pathways. The Critical Care Societies Collaborative convened a task force to review these CCM pathways and to provide recommendations for unified and coordinated training requirements for IM-based physicians.
A group of CCM professionals certified in pulmonary-CCM and/or IM-CCM from ACGME-accredited training programs who have expertise in education, administration, research, and clinical practice.
Data Sources and Synthesis
Relevant published literature was accessed through a MEDLINE search and references provided by all task force members. Material published by the ACGME, American Board of Internal Medicine, and other specialty organizations was also reviewed. Collaboratively and iteratively, the task force reached consensus using a roundtable meeting, electronic mail, and conference calls.
Main Results
Internal medicine-CCM–based fellowships have disparate program requirements compared to other internal medicine subspecialties and adult CCM fellowships. Differences between IM-CCM and pulmonary-CCM programs include the ratio of key clinical faculty to fellows and a requirement to perform 50 therapeutic bronchoscopies. Competency-based training was considered uniformly desirable for all CCM training pathways.
The task force concluded that requesting competency-based training and minimizing variations in the requirements for IM-based CCM fellowship programs will facilitate effective CCM training for both programs and trainees.
PMCID: PMC4165588  PMID: 24637881
training; critical care medicine; internal medicine; fellowship education; requirements; workforce
22.  A nomogram to predict the probability of passing the American Board of Internal Medicine examination 
Medical Education Online  2012;17:10.3402/meo.v17i0.18810.
Although the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) certification is valued as a reflection of physicians’ experience, education, and expertise, limited methods exist to predict performance in the examination.
The objective of this study was to develop and validate a predictive tool based on variables common to all residency programs, regarding the probability of an internal medicine graduate passing the ABIM certification examination.
The development cohort was obtained from the files of the Cleveland Clinic internal medicine residents who began training between 2004 and 2008. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to predict the ABIM passing rate. The model was represented as a nomogram, which was internally validated with bootstrap resamples. The external validation was done retrospectively on a cohort of residents who graduated from two other independent internal medicine residency programs between 2007 and 2011.
Of the 194 Cleveland Clinic graduates used for the nomogram development, 175 (90.2%) successfully passed the ABIM certification examination. The final nomogram included four predictors: In-Training Examination (ITE) scores in postgraduate year (PGY) 1, 2, and 3, and the number of months of overnight calls in the last 6 months of residency. The nomogram achieved a concordance index (CI) of 0.98 after correcting for over-fitting bias and allowed for the determination of an estimated probability of passing the ABIM exam. Of the 126 graduates from two other residency programs used for external validation, 116 (92.1%) passed the ABIM examination. The nomogram CI in the external validation cohort was 0.94, suggesting outstanding discrimination.
A simple user-friendly predictive tool, based on readily available data, was developed to predict the probability of passing the ABIM exam for internal medicine residents. This may guide program directors’ decision-making related to program curriculum and advice given to individual residents regarding board preparation.
PMCID: PMC3475012  PMID: 23078794
board examination; in-training examination; internal medicine; residents; program directors
23.  Relationships between high-stakes clinical skills exam scores and program director global competency ratings of first-year pediatric residents 
Medical Education Online  2011;16:10.3402/meo.v16i0.7362.
Responding to mandates from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and American Osteopathic Association (AOA), residency programs have developed competency-based assessment tools. One such tool is the American College of Osteopathic Pediatricians (ACOP) program directors’ annual report. High-stakes clinical skills licensing examinations, such as the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination Level 2-Performance Evaluation (COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE), also assess competency in several clinical domains.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between program director competency ratings of first-year osteopathic residents in pediatrics and COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE scores from 2005 to 2009.
The sample included all 94 pediatric first-year residents who took COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE and whose training was reviewed by the ACOP for approval of training between 2005 and 2009. Program director competency ratings and COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE scores (domain and component) were merged and analyzed for relationships.
Biomedical/biomechanical domain scores were positively correlated with overall program director competency ratings. Humanistic domain scores were not significantly correlated with overall program director competency ratings, but did show moderate correlation with ratings for interpersonal and communication skills. The six ACGME or seven AOA competencies assessed empirically by the ACOP program directors’ annual report could not be recovered by principal component analysis; instead, three factors were identified, accounting for 86% of the variance between competency ratings.
A few significant correlations were noted between COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE scores and program director competency ratings. Exploring relationships between different clinical skills assessments is inherently difficult because of the heterogeneity of tools used and overlap of constructs within the AOA and ACGME core competencies.
PMCID: PMC3174084  PMID: 21927550
residency program director ratings; clinical skills testing; high-stakes licensing exam; competency assessment; pediatric residents; external validity; COMLEX-USA
24.  Meeting Requirements and Changing Culture 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2004;19(5 Pt 2):492-495.
The Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the Residency Review Committee require a competency-based, accessible evaluation system. The paper system at our institution did not meet these demands and suffered from low compliance. A diverse committee of internal medicine faculty, program directors, and house staff designed a new clinical evaluation strategy based on ACGME competencies and utilizing a modular web-based system called ResEval. ResEval more effectively met requirements and provided useful data for program and curriculum development. The system is paperless, allows for evaluations at any time, and produces customized evaluation reports, dramatically improving our ability to analyze evaluation data. The use of this novel system and the inclusion of a robust technology infrastructure, repeated training and e-mail reminders, and program leadership commitment resulted in an increase in clinical skills evaluations performed and a rapid change in the workflow and culture of evaluation at our residency program.
PMCID: PMC1492338  PMID: 15109310
house staff evaluation; clinical skills assessment; internal medicine residency; Internet; educational measurement
25.  Providing competency-based family medicine residency training in substance abuse in the new millennium: a model curriculum 
BMC Medical Education  2010;10:33.
This article, developed for the Betty Ford Institute Consensus Conference on Graduate Medical Education (December, 2008), presents a model curriculum for Family Medicine residency training in substance abuse.
The authors reviewed reports of past Family Medicine curriculum development efforts, previously-identified barriers to education in high risk substance use, approaches to overcoming these barriers, and current training guidelines of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and their Family Medicine Residency Review Committee. A proposed eight-module curriculum was developed, based on substance abuse competencies defined by Project MAINSTREAM and linked to core competencies defined by the ACGME. The curriculum provides basic training in high risk substance use to all residents, while also addressing current training challenges presented by U.S. work hour regulations, increasing international diversity of Family Medicine resident trainees, and emerging new primary care practice models.
This paper offers a core curriculum, focused on screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment, which can be adapted by residency programs to meet their individual needs. The curriculum encourages direct observation of residents to ensure that core skills are learned and trains residents with several "new skills" that will expand the basket of substance abuse services they will be equipped to provide as they enter practice.
Broad-based implementation of a comprehensive Family Medicine residency curriculum should increase the ability of family physicians to provide basic substance abuse services in a primary care context. Such efforts should be coupled with faculty development initiatives which ensure that sufficient trained faculty are available to teach these concepts and with efforts by major Family Medicine organizations to implement and enforce residency requirements for substance abuse training.
PMCID: PMC2885404  PMID: 20459842

Results 1-25 (1040873)