Evaluating Resident Procedural Skills: Faculty Assess a Scoring Tool.
Journal
PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)
ISSN: 2575-7873
Titre abrégé: PRiMER
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101726396
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
entrez:
16
6
2020
pubmed:
17
6
2020
medline:
17
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Procedural skills assessment is critical in residency training. The Council of Academic Family Medicine recommends the Procedural Competency Assessment Tool (PCAT) for assessing procedure competence of family medicine residents. We sought to evaluate the reliability of the PCAT and to better identify its strengths and limitations. In this mixed-methods study conducted in 2017, 18 faculty members of an academic family medicine residency program watched a video of one of the authors performing a simulated shave biopsy with intentional errors. Faculty scored the procedure using the shave biopsy PCAT, then participated in a focus group discussion of the rationale for the scores given. Qualitative analysis assessed perceived benefits and challenges of the PCAT. Following the discussion, faculty scored the same procedure again, using a PCAT modified with additional objective criteria. On the original PCAT, 40% of respondents rated the physician as competent. This dropped to 21.4% on the modified PCAT ( Further studies regarding PCAT validity and reliability are needed. The PCAT may require further norming with additional objective criteria to improve reliability. Residencies may train faculty on using the PCAT to improve interobserver agreement, or decide to use a more intuitive checklist evaluation tool.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Procedural skills assessment is critical in residency training. The Council of Academic Family Medicine recommends the Procedural Competency Assessment Tool (PCAT) for assessing procedure competence of family medicine residents. We sought to evaluate the reliability of the PCAT and to better identify its strengths and limitations.
METHODS
METHODS
In this mixed-methods study conducted in 2017, 18 faculty members of an academic family medicine residency program watched a video of one of the authors performing a simulated shave biopsy with intentional errors. Faculty scored the procedure using the shave biopsy PCAT, then participated in a focus group discussion of the rationale for the scores given. Qualitative analysis assessed perceived benefits and challenges of the PCAT. Following the discussion, faculty scored the same procedure again, using a PCAT modified with additional objective criteria.
RESULTS
RESULTS
On the original PCAT, 40% of respondents rated the physician as competent. This dropped to 21.4% on the modified PCAT (
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Further studies regarding PCAT validity and reliability are needed. The PCAT may require further norming with additional objective criteria to improve reliability. Residencies may train faculty on using the PCAT to improve interobserver agreement, or decide to use a more intuitive checklist evaluation tool.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32537604
doi: 10.22454/PRiMER.2020.462869
pii: primer-4-4
pmc: PMC7279116
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
4Informations de copyright
© 2020 by the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine.
Références
Med Educ. 2015 Feb;49(2):161-73
pubmed: 25626747
Acad Med. 2010 Oct;85(10 Suppl):S25-8
pubmed: 20881697
Med Teach. 2020 Jan;42(1):46-51
pubmed: 31429366
Med Teach. 2015 Mar;37(3):245-51
pubmed: 25523113
Surgery. 2005 Oct;138(4):640-7; discussion 647-9
pubmed: 16269292
Fam Med. 2012 Nov-Dec;44(10):723-6
pubmed: 23148006
J Urol. 2012 Nov;188(5):1877-82
pubmed: 22999693
Acad Med. 2015 Aug;90(8):1025-33
pubmed: 25881645
Simul Healthc. 2009 Spring;4(1):6-16
pubmed: 19212245