An Examination of Self-Reported Assessment Activities Documented by Specialist Physicians for Maintenance of Certification.


Journal

The Journal of continuing education in the health professions
ISSN: 1554-558X
Titre abrégé: J Contin Educ Health Prof
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8805847

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
entrez: 10 3 2020
pubmed: 10 3 2020
medline: 10 4 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Specialists in a Maintenance of Certification program are required to participate in assessment activities, such as chart audit, simulation, knowledge assessment, and multisource feedback. This study examined data from five different specialties to identify variation in participation in assessment activities, examine differences in the learning stimulated by assessment, assess the frequency and type of planned changes, and assess the association between learning, discussion, and planned changes. E-portfolio data were categorized and analyzed descriptively. Chi-squared tests examined associations. A total of 2854 anatomical pathologists, cardiologists, gastroenterologists, ophthalmologists, and orthopedic surgeons provided data about 6063 assessment activities. Although there were differences in the role that learning played by discipline and assessment type, the most common activities documented across all specialties were self-assessment programs (n = 2122), feedback on teaching (n = 1078), personal practice assessments which the physician did themselves (n = 751), annual reviews (n = 682), and reviews by third parties (n = 661). Learning occurred for 93% of the activities and was associated with change. For 2126 activities, there were planned changes. Activities in which there was a discussion with a peer or supervisor were more likely to result in a change. Although specialists engaged in many types of assessment activities to meet the Maintenance of Certification program requirements, there was variability in how assessment stimulated learning and planned changes. It seems that peer discussion may be an important component in fostering practice change and forming plans for improvement which bears further study.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32149945
doi: 10.1097/CEH.0000000000000283
pii: 00005141-202004010-00004
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

19-26

Références

Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, Jamtvedt G, et al. Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29:1534–1541.
Colquhoun HL, Carroll K, Eva KW, et al. Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses. Implement Sci. 2017;12:117.
Lockyer J. Multisource feedback: can it meet criteria for good assessment? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2013;33:89–98.
Ferguson J, Wakeling J, Bowie P. Factors influencing the effectiveness of multisource feedback in improving the professional practice of medical doctors: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:76.
Wakeling J, Holmes S, Boyd A, et al. Reflective practice for patient benefit: an analysis of doctors' appraisal portfolios in Scotland. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2019;39:13–20.
Griswold-Theodorson S, Ponnuru S, Dong C, et al. Beyond the simulation laboratory: a realist synthesis review of clinical outcomes of simulation-based mastery learning. Acad Med. 2015;90:1553–1560.
Pluye P, Grad R, Granikov V, et al. Feasibility of a knowledge translation CME program: courriels Cochrane. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2012;32:134–141.
van der Meulen MW, Smirnova A, Heeneman S, et al. Exploring validity evidence associated with questionnaire-based tools for assessing the professional performance of physicians: a systematic review. Acad Med. 2019;94:1384–1397.
Van Der Leeuw RM, Boerebach BC, Lombarts KM, et al. Clinical teaching performance improvement of faculty in residency training: a prospective cohort study. Med Teach. 2016;38:464–470.
van der Leeuw RM, Overeem K, Arah OA, et al. Frequency and determinants of residents narrative feedback on the teaching performance of faculty: narratives in numbers. Acad Med. 2013;88:1324–1331.
Gagliardi AR, Wright FC, Anderson MA, et al. The role of collegial interaction in continuing professional development. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007;27:214–219.
Connelly MT, Inui TS, Oken E, et al. Annual performance reviews of, for and by faculty: a qualitative analysis of one department's experiences. J Fac Dev. 2018;32:5–12.
Bland CJ, Wersal L, VanLoy W, et al. Evaluating faculty performance: a systematically designed and assessed approach. Acad Med. 2002;77:15–30.
Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD000259.
Baker K. Clinical teaching improves with resident evaluation and feedback. Anesthesiology. 2010;113:693–703.
van der Leeuw RM, Slootweg IA, Heineman MJ, et al. Explaining how faculty members act upon residents' feedback to improve their teaching performance. Med Educ. 2013;47:1089–1098.
van der Leeuw RM, Schipper MP, Heineman MJ, et al. Residents' narrative feedback on teaching performance of clinical teachers: analysis of the content and phrasing of suggestions for improvement. Postgrad Med J. 2016;92:145–151.
Cervero RM, Gaines JK. The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: an updated synthesis of systematic reviews. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2015;35:131–138.
Ajjawi R, Regehr G. When I say…feedback. Med Educ. 2019;53:652–654.
Johnson MJ, May CR. Promoting professional behaviour change in healthcare: what interventions work, and why? A theory-led overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008592.
Medical Council of Canada. A National Multi-Source Feedback Program to Evaluate Physician Workplace Performance in their Roles as Communicator, Collaborator and Professional: MCC 360. Available at: https://mcc.ca/assessments/mcc360/. Accessed July 28, 2019.
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. MOC Program Regulations and Policies for Fellows. Available at: http://www.royalcollege.ca/rcsite/cpd/moc-program/fellows/moc-regulations-policies-for-fellows-e. Accessed July 28, 2019.
Lockyer JM, Sockalingam S, Campbell C. Assessment and change: an exploration of documented assessment activities and outcomes by Canadian psychiatrists. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2018;38:235–243.
Fox RW, Mazmanian PE, Putnam RW. Changing and Learning in the Lives of Physicians. New York, NY: Praeger; 1989.
Amar C, Pomey MP, SanMartin C, et al. Sustainability: orthopaedic surgery wait time management strategies. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2015;28:320–331.
Dyck M, Embil JM, Trepman E, et al. Surgical site infection surveillance for elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47:157–163.
Tan JCK, Ferdi AC, Gillies MC, et al. Clinical registries in Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2019;126:655–662.
McFadyen C, Lankshear S, Divaris D, et al. Physician level reporting of surgical and pathology performance indicators: a regional study to assess feasibility and impact on quality. Can J Surg. 2015;58:31–40.
Tabatabai ZL, Auger M, Kurtycz DF, et al. Performance characteristics of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the salivary glands in fine-needle aspirates: results from the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytology Program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015;139:1525–1530.
Carpentier S, Sharara N, Barkun AN, et al. Pilot Validation Study: Canadian Global Rating Scale for colonoscopy services. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;2016:6982739.
Janssen RM, Takach O, Nap-Hill E, et al. Time to endoscopy in patients with colorectal cancer: analysis of wait-times. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;2016:8714587.
Cohen J Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillside, New Jersey: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates; 1988:222.
Chesluk BJ, Reddy S, Hess B, et al. Assessing interprofessional teamwork: pilot test of a new assessment module for practicing physicians. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2015;35:3–10.
Sargeant J, Lockyer J, Mann K, et al. Facilitated reflective performance feedback: developing an evidence- and theory-based model that builds relationship, explores reactions and content, and coaches for performance change (R2C2). Acad Med. 2015;90:1698–1706.
Dalhousie University, R2C2 Resources. Available at: https://medicine.dal.ca/departments/core-units/cpd/faculty-development/R2C2.html. Accessed September 26, 2019.
Sargeant J, Armson H, Chesluk B, et al. The processes and dimensions of informed self-assessment: a conceptual model. Acad Med. 2010;85:1212–1220.
Pooley M, Pizzuti C, Daly M. Optimizing multisource feedback implementation for australasian physicians. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2019;39:228–235.

Auteurs

Jocelyn Lockyer (J)

Dr. Lockyer: Professor, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Canada. Ms. DiMillo: Senior Data and Research Analyst, Health Policy and Advocacy, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. Dr. Campbell: Principal Senior Advisor, Competency-based CPD and interim Director, Continuing Professional Development, Office of Specialty Education, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, and Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH