Katz Steven J, Wang Dennis
Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, CAN.
Cureus. 2022 Jun 9;14(6):e25798. doi: 10.7759/cureus.25798. eCollection 2022 Jun.
Introduction Competency by Design (CBD) began on July 1, 2019, for postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) Canadian Core Internal Medicine (CIM) residents. Many entrustable professional activity (EPA) observations allow for assessment by either a faculty physician, senior medicine resident (SMR), or subspecialty resident (SSR). However, few studies exist that compare EPA scores and comments given by faculty vs senior trainees (SMRs and SSRs). This study aimed to identify differences in EPA scores and comments given to PGY1 residents by faculty physicians vs senior trainees. Methods Scores and comments of EPAs completed between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, for 35 CIM PGY1 residents were extracted anonymously from the University of Alberta CBD platform. Scores from faculty vs senior trainees were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. Word counts for positive and constructive comments written by faculty vs senior trainees were compared with the independent t-test and one-way ANOVA. The most common two-word phrases in comments were identified with QI Macros software (Denver, CO: KnowWare International, Inc.). Results A total of 2226 EPAs were observed. Faculty physicians gave significantly lower EPA scores overall compared to senior trainees (U = 501706, P <0.001). Constructive comments written by faculty (M = 14.06, SD = 16.84) had lower word counts compared to senior trainees (M = 15.85, SD = 16.43) for overall EPAs (t{2224} = -2.528, P = 0.012). Conclusion Faculty physicians gave lower EPA scores and had lower word counts on constructive comments, compared to senior trainees. These results may help the ongoing implementation of Competence by Design.
引言 “以设计促能力提升”(CBD)于2019年7月1日起适用于加拿大内科住院医师第一年(PGY1)的核心内科(CIM)住院医师。许多可托付专业活动(EPA)观察可由带教医师、内科高级住院医师(SMR)或专科住院医师(SSR)进行评估。然而,很少有研究比较带教医师与高级住院医师(SMR和SSR)给出的EPA评分及评语。本研究旨在确定带教医师与高级住院医师给予PGY1住院医师的EPA评分及评语的差异。方法 从阿尔伯塔大学CBD平台匿名提取2019年7月1日至2020年6月30日期间35名CIM PGY1住院医师完成的EPA评分和评语。使用曼-惠特尼U检验和克鲁斯卡尔-沃利斯检验比较带教医师与高级住院医师的评分。使用独立t检验和单因素方差分析比较带教医师与高级住院医师撰写的正面和建设性评语的字数。使用QI Macros软件(科罗拉多州丹佛市:KnowWare International公司)确定评语中最常见的双词短语。结果 共观察到2226项EPA。总体而言,带教医师给出的EPA评分显著低于高级住院医师(U = 501706,P <0.001)。对于总体EPA,带教医师撰写的建设性评语(M = 14.06,标准差 = 16.84)的字数低于高级住院医师(M = 15.85,标准差 = 16.43)(t{2224} = -2.528,P = 0.012)。结论 与高级住院医师相比,带教医师给出的EPA评分较低,建设性评语的字数也较少。这些结果可能有助于“以设计促能力提升”的持续实施。