Use of graded responsibility and common entrustment considerations among United States emergency medicine residency programs
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires all residency programs to provide increasing autonomy as residents progress through training, known as graded responsibility. However, there is little guidance on how to implement graded responsibility in practice and a paucity of literature on how it is currently implemented in emergency medicine (EM). Wesought to determine how EM residency programs apply graded responsibility across a variety of activities and to identify which considerations are important in affording additional responsibilities to trainees. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of EM residency programs using a 23-question survey that was distributed by email to162 ACGME-accredited EM program directors. Seven different domains of practice were queried. Results: We received 91 responses (56.2% response rate) to the survey. Among all domains of practice except for managing critically illmedical patients, the use of graded responsibility exceeded 50% of surveyed programs. When graded responsibility was applied,post-graduate year (PGY) level was ranked an “extremely important” or “very important” consideration between 80.9% and 100.0% ofthe time. Conclusion: The majority of EM residency programs are implementing graded responsibility within most domains of practice. Whendecisions are made surrounding graded responsibility, programs still rely heavily on the time-based model of PGY level to determineadvancement.
Abstract
Purpose: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires all residency programs to provide increasing autonomy as residents progress through training, known as graded responsibility. However, there is little guidance on how to implement graded responsibility in practice and a paucity of literature on how it is currently implemented in emergency medicine (EM). Wesought to determine how EM residency programs apply graded responsibility across a variety of activities and to identify which considerations are important in affording additional responsibilities to trainees. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of EM residency programs using a 23-question survey that was distributed by email to162 ACGME-accredited EM program directors. Seven different domains of practice were queried. Results: We received 91 responses (56.2% response rate) to the survey. Among all domains of practice except for managing critically illmedical patients, the use of graded responsibility exceeded 50% of surveyed programs. When graded responsibility was applied,post-graduate year (PGY) level was ranked an “extremely important” or “very important” consideration between 80.9% and 100.0% ofthe time. Conclusion: The majority of EM residency programs are implementing graded responsibility within most domains of practice. Whendecisions are made surrounding graded responsibility, programs still rely heavily on the time-based model of PGY level to determineadvancement.
참고문헌 (15)
- "ACGME common program requirements" (2017)[URL]
- Olle ten Cate, "Entrustability of professional activities and competency-based training", Medical Education, 39(12), pp.1176~1177 (2005), Wiley[DOI]
- Jeanne M. Franzone, "Progressive Independence in Clinical Training: Perspectives of a National, Multispecialty Panel of Residents and Fellows", Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 7(4), pp.700~704 (2015), Journal of Graduate Medical Education[DOI]
- Benjamin Schnapp, "A Graduated Responsibility Supervising Resident Experience Using Mastery Learning Principles", MedEdPublish, 8(3) (2019), Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE)[DOI]
- Frank JR, "CanMEDS 2015: physician competency framework", Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, ~ (2015)
- Michael S. Beeson, "Entrustable Professional Activities: Making Sense of the Emergency Medicine Milestones", The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 47(4), pp.441~452 (2014), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Mary Chapple, "The Nominal Group Technique: extending the evaluation of students' teaching and learning experiences", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(2), pp.147~160 (2006), Informa UK Limited[DOI]
- Karen Schultz, "The Application of Entrustable Professional Activities to Inform Competency Decisions in a Family Medicine Residency Program", Academic Medicine, 90(7), pp.888~897 (2015), Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)[DOI]
- John Norcini, "Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31", Medical Teacher, 29(9-10), pp.855~871 (2009), Informa UK Limited[DOI]
- Jason R. Frank, "Competency-based medical education: theory to practice", Medical Teacher, 32(8), pp.638~645 (2010), Informa UK Limited[DOI]
- Carol Carraccio, "Driving care quality: aligning trainee assessment and supervision through practical application of entrustable professional activities, competencies, and milestones", Academic Medicine, 91(2), pp.199~203 (2016), Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)[DOI]
- James Li, "Survey of moonlighting practices and work requirements of emergency medicine residents", The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 18(2), pp.147~151 (2000), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Adrian Furnham, "Response bias, social desirability and dissimulation", Personality and Individual Differences, 7(3), pp.385~400 (1986), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Richard A. Berk, "An Introduction to Sample Selection Bias in Sociological Data", American Sociological Review, 48(3), pp.386~ (1983), SAGE Publications[DOI]
- "The milestones guidebook" (2016)[URL]