A Delphi Study to Validate the Patient-Centered Doctor’S Competency Framework in Korea
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Defining a competent doctor is important for educating and training doctors. However, competency frameworks have rarely been validated during the process of their development in Korea. The purpose of this study was to validate the patient-centered doctor’s competency framework, which had been developed by our expert working group (EWG). Two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys were conducted among a panel of experts on medicine and medical education. The panel members were provided with six core competencies, 17 sub-competencies, and 53 enabling competencies, and were asked to rate the importance of these competencies on a 5-point Likert scale. Between April and July 2021, a total of 28 experts completed both rounds. The data of the Delphi study were analyzed for the mean, standard deviation, median, inter-rater agreement (IRA), and content validity ratio (CVR). A CVR >0.36 and IRA ≥0.75 were deemed to indicate validity and agreement. This study found that five enabling competencies were not valid, and agreement was not reached for three sub-competencies and two enabling competencies. In consideration of CVR and the individual opinions of panel members at each session, the final competencies were extracted through consensus meetings of the EWG. The competencies were modified into six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 enabling competencies. This study is meaningful in that it proposes patient-centered doctor’s competencies enabling the development of residents’ milestone competencies, an assessment system, and educational programs.
Abstract
Defining a competent doctor is important for educating and training doctors. However, competency frameworks have rarely been validated during the process of their development in Korea. The purpose of this study was to validate the patient-centered doctor’s competency framework, which had been developed by our expert working group (EWG). Two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys were conducted among a panel of experts on medicine and medical education. The panel members were provided with six core competencies, 17 sub-competencies, and 53 enabling competencies, and were asked to rate the importance of these competencies on a 5-point Likert scale. Between April and July 2021, a total of 28 experts completed both rounds. The data of the Delphi study were analyzed for the mean, standard deviation, median, inter-rater agreement (IRA), and content validity ratio (CVR). A CVR >0.36 and IRA ≥0.75 were deemed to indicate validity and agreement. This study found that five enabling competencies were not valid, and agreement was not reached for three sub-competencies and two enabling competencies. In consideration of CVR and the individual opinions of panel members at each session, the final competencies were extracted through consensus meetings of the EWG. The competencies were modified into six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 enabling competencies. This study is meaningful in that it proposes patient-centered doctor’s competencies enabling the development of residents’ milestone competencies, an assessment system, and educational programs.
참고문헌 (29)
- Swing SR, "The ACGME outcome project : retrospective and prospective", Med Teach, 29(7), pp.648~654 (2007)[DOI]
- CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework, "Frank JR", The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, ~ (2015)
- General Medical Council, "Good medical practice" (2020), General Medical Council
- Development of generic curriculum for graduate medical education, "Lee MS", Research Institute for Healthcare Policy, Korea Medical Association, ~ (2010)
- A study on the reorganization of the training curriculum for efficient training of the residents, "Kim JJ", Ministry of Health and Welfare, ~ (2013)
- "Announcement of partial revision of annual training curriculum for residents" (2019)[URL]
- Kim HJ, "A recognition survey by psychiatry residents and psychiatrists regarding the quality of residency training and clinical competence in Korea", J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc, 59(2), pp.148~158 (2020)[DOI]
- Kim SG, "New start of surgical residents training : the first survey of program directors in Korea", BMC Med Educ, 19(1), pp.208~ (2019)[DOI]
- A study on role of Korea’s doctors, "Ahn DS", Ministry of Health and Welfare, ~ (2013)
- Nasca TJ, "The next GME accreditation system : rationale and benefits", N Engl J Med, 366(11), pp.1051~1056 (2012)[DOI]
- Draft CanMEDS 2015 milestones guide, "Frank JR", The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, ~ (2014)
- Jeon WT, "Development of a new framework for doctor’s competencies in Korea", Korean Med Educ Rev, 24(2), pp.77~78 (2022)[DOI]
- Jeon WT, "Patient-centered doctor’s competency framework in Korea", Korean Med Educ Rev, 24(2), pp.79~92 (2022)[DOI]
- Kim YJ, "Research trends on doctor’s job competencies in Korea using text network analysis", Korean Med Educ Rev, 24(2), pp.93~102 (2022)[DOI]
- Jung H, "Analysis of social needs for doctors and medicine through a keyword analysis of newspaper articles(2016-2020)", Korean Med Educ Rev, 24(2), pp.103~112 (2022)[DOI]
- Kim C, "Social accountability in medical education", Proceedings of the Korean Medical Education Conference 2022 of The Korean Society of Medical Education (2022), Korean Society of Medical Education
- Yune S, "A study on the patient-centered doctor’s competency in Korea: Korean doctor’s competency as perceived by citizens and medical professionals", Proceedings of the Korean Medical Education Conference 2022 of The Korean Society of Medical Education (2022), Korean Society of Medical Education
- Humphrey-Murto S, "Using consensus group methods such as Delphi and Nominal Group in medical education research", Med Teach, 39(1), pp.14~19 (2017)[DOI]
- Hasson F, "Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique", J Adv Nurs, 32(4), pp.1008~1015 (2000)[DOI]
- Lawshe CH, "A quantitative approach to content validity", Pers Psychol, 28(4), pp.563~575 (1975)[DOI]
- Yaszay B, "ACGME core competencies : where are we?", Orthopedics, 32(3), pp.171~ (2009)
- Stutsky BJ, "Determining the weighting and relative importance of CanMEDS roles and competencies", BMC Res Notes, 5, pp.354~ (2012)[DOI]
- Rademakers JJ, "Senior medical students’ appraisal of CanMEDS competencies", Med Educ, 41(10), pp.990~994 (2007)[DOI]
- Boroumand S, "Addressing the health advocate role in medical education", BMC Med Educ, 20(1), pp.28~ (2020)[DOI]
- Daniel M, "An update on developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic : a BEME scoping review : BEME guide no. 64", Med Teach, 43(3), pp.253~271 (2021)[DOI]
- Papapanou M, "Medical education challenges and innovations during COVID-19 pandemic", Postgrad Med J, 98(1159), pp.321~327 (2022)[DOI]
- Kaul V, "Medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic", Chest, 159(5), pp.1949~1960 (2021)[DOI]
- Cutter CM, "Accountability to population health in the COVID-19 pandemic : designing health care delivery within a social responsibility framework", Popul Health Manag, 24(1), pp.3~5 (2021)[DOI]
- Nelson E, "Social accountability and health systems’ change, beyond the shock of COVID-19 : drawing on histories of technical and activist approaches to rethink a shared code of practice", Int J Equity Health, 21(Suppl 1), pp.41~ (2022)[DOI]