Lypson Monica L, Prince Mark E P, Kasten Steven J, Osborne Nicholas H, Cohan Richard H, Kowalenko Terry, Dougherty Paul J, Reynolds R Kevin, Spires M Catherine, Kozlow Jeffrey H, Gitlin Scott D
Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, 2215 Fuller Road #11J, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Feb 17;16:65. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0586-4.
Reviewing program educational efforts is an important component of postgraduate medical education program accreditation. The post-graduate review process has evolved over time to include centralized oversight based on accreditation standards. The institutional review process and the impact on participating faculty are topics not well described in the literature.
We conducted multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to identify and implement areas for change to improve productivity in our institutional program review committee. We also conducted one focus group and six in-person interviews with 18 committee members to explore their perspectives on the committee's evolution. One author (MLL) reviewed the transcripts and performed the initial thematic coding with a PhD level research associate and identified and categorized themes. These themes were confirmed by all participating committee members upon review of a detailed summary. Emergent themes were triangulated with the University of Michigan Medical School's Admissions Executive Committee (AEC).
We present an overview of adopted new practices to the educational program evaluation process at the University of Michigan Health System that includes standardization of meetings, inclusion of resident members, development of area content experts, solicitation of committed committee members, transition from paper to electronic committee materials, and focus on continuous improvement. Faculty and resident committee members identified multiple improvement areas including the ability to provide high quality reviews of training programs, personal and professional development, and improved feedback from program trainees.
A standing committee that utilizes the expertise of a group of committed faculty members and which includes formal resident membership has significant advantages over ad hoc or other organizational structures for program evaluation committees.
审查项目教育工作是研究生医学教育项目认证的重要组成部分。研究生审查过程随着时间的推移不断演变,纳入了基于认证标准的集中监督。机构审查过程及其对参与教师的影响在文献中描述得并不充分。
我们开展了多个计划-执行-研究-改进(PDSA)循环,以识别并实施改进领域,提高我们机构项目审查委员会的工作效率。我们还组织了一次焦点小组讨论,并与18名委员会成员进行了6次面对面访谈,以探讨他们对委员会发展演变的看法。一位作者(MLL)与一名具有博士水平的研究助理一起审查了访谈记录并进行了初步的主题编码,确定并归类了主题。所有参与的委员会成员在审查详细总结后确认了这些主题。通过与密歇根大学医学院招生执行委员会(AEC)进行三角互证,验证了新出现的主题。
我们概述了密歇根大学健康系统在教育项目评估过程中采用的新做法,包括会议标准化、纳入住院医师成员、培养领域内容专家、招募敬业的委员会成员、从纸质委员会材料过渡到电子材料,以及注重持续改进。教师和住院医师委员会成员确定了多个改进领域,包括对培训项目进行高质量审查的能力、个人和职业发展,以及来自项目学员的更好反馈。
一个利用一群敬业教师的专业知识且包括正式住院医师成员的常务委员会,相较于临时或其他组织结构的项目评估委员会具有显著优势。