Salzman David H, Rising Kristin L, Cameron Kenzie A, Powell Rhea E, Papanagnou Dimitri, Doty Amanda, Piserchia Katherine, Latimer Lori, McGaghie William C, McCarthy Danielle M
J Grad Med Educ. 2020 Feb;12(1):58-65. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-19-00483.1.
Historically, medically trained experts have served as judges to establish a minimum passing standard (MPS) for mastery learning. As mastery learning expands from procedure-based skills to patient-centered domains, such as communication, there is an opportunity to incorporate patients as judges in setting the MPS.
We described our process of incorporating patients as judges to set the MPS and compared the MPS set by patients and emergency medicine residency program directors (PDs).
Patient and physician panels were convened to determine an MPS for a 21-item Uncertainty Communication Checklist. The MPS for both panels were independently calculated using the Mastery Angoff method. Mean scores on individual checklist items with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were also calculated for both panels and differences analyzed using a test.
Of 240 eligible patients and 42 eligible PDs, 25 patients and 13 PDs (26% and 65% cooperation rates, respectively) completed MPS-setting procedures. The patient-generated MPS was 84.0% (range 45.2-96.2, SD 10.2) and the physician-generated MPS was 88.2% (range 79.7-98.1, SD 5.5). The overall MPS, calculated as an average of these 2 results, was 86.1% (range 45.2-98.1, SD 9.0), or 19 of 21 checklist items.
Patients are able to serve as judges to establish an MPS using the Mastery Angoff method for a task performed by resident physicians. The patient-established MPS was nearly identical to that generated by a panel of residency PDs, indicating similar expectations of proficiency for residents to achieve skill "mastery."
从历史上看,受过医学培训的专家一直担任评判者,以确立掌握学习的最低及格标准(MPS)。随着掌握学习从基于程序的技能扩展到以患者为中心的领域,如沟通,有机会让患者参与到确定MPS的评判中来。
我们描述了让患者作为评判者来确定MPS的过程,并比较了患者和急诊医学住院医师培训项目主任(PD)所确定的MPS。
召集了患者和医生小组,以确定一份包含21项内容的不确定性沟通清单的MPS。两个小组的MPS均使用掌握安格夫方法独立计算。还计算了两个小组在各个清单项目上的平均得分及其相应的95%置信区间,并使用t检验分析差异。
在240名符合条件的患者和42名符合条件的PD中,分别有25名患者和13名PD(合作率分别为26%和65%)完成了MPS确定程序。患者确定的MPS为84.0%(范围45.2 - 96.2,标准差10.2),医生确定的MPS为88.2%(范围79.7 - 98.1,标准差5.5)。将这两个结果平均计算得出的总体MPS为86.1%(范围45.2 - 98.1,标准差9.0),即21项清单项目中的19项。
患者能够作为评判者,使用掌握安格夫方法为住院医师执行的一项任务确立MPS。患者确立的MPS与住院医师培训项目PD小组确定的MPS几乎相同,这表明对住院医师达到技能“掌握”水平的熟练程度期望相似。