Radiation Oncology Resident Education: Is Change Needed?

Change management Leading institutional change Mixed-methods survey Oncology didactics Parallel survey study Radiation oncology didactics Resident education

Journal

Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education
ISSN: 1543-0154
Titre abrégé: J Cancer Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8610343

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 May 2024
Historique:
accepted: 10 05 2024
medline: 18 5 2024
pubmed: 18 5 2024
entrez: 18 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Leading successful change efforts first requires assessment of the "before change" environment and culture. At our institution, the radiation oncology (RO) residents follow a longitudinal didactic learning program consisting of weekly 1-h lectures, case conferences, and journal clubs. The resident didactic education series format has not changed since its inception over 10 years ago. We evaluated the perceptions of current residents and faculty about the effectiveness of the curriculum in its present form. Two parallel surveys were designed, one each for residents and attendings, to assess current attitudes regarding the effectiveness and need for change in the RO residency curriculum, specifically the traditional didactic lectures, the journal club sessions, and the case conferences. We also investigated perceived levels of engagement among residents and faculty, whether self-assessments would be useful to increase material retention, and how often the content of didactic lectures is updated. Surveys were distributed individually to each resident (N = 10) and attending (N = 24) either in-person or via Zoom. Following completion of the survey, respondents were informally interviewed about their perspectives on the curriculum's strengths and weaknesses. Compared to 46% of attendings, 80% of RO residents believed that the curriculum should be changed. Twenty percent of residents felt that the traditional didactic lectures were effective in preparing them to manage patients in the clinic, compared to 74% of attendings. Similarly, 10% of residents felt that the journal club sessions were effective vs. 42% of attendings. Finally, 40% of residents felt that the case conferences were effective vs. 67% of attendings. Overall, most respondents (56%) favored change in the curriculum. Our results suggest that the perceptions of the residents did not align with those of the attending physicians with respect to the effectiveness of the curriculum and the need for change. The discrepancies between resident and faculty views highlight the importance of a dedicated change management effort to mitigate this gap. Based on this project, we plan to propose recommended changes in structure to the residency program directors. Main changes would be to increase the interactive nature of the course material, incorporate more ways to increase faculty engagement, and consider self-assessment questions to promote retention. Once we get approval from the residency program leadership, we will follow Kotter's "Eight steps to transforming your organization" to ensure the highest potential for faculty to accept the expectations of a new curriculum.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38761305
doi: 10.1007/s13187-024-02455-4
pii: 10.1007/s13187-024-02455-4
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to American Association for Cancer Education.

Références

Rajiah P, Bhargava P (2017) Change management-a radiology administrator’s primer. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 46(5):382–384. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.06.010
doi: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.06.010 pubmed: 28705524
Kotter JP (1995) Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harv Bus Rev 73:59–67
Errida A, Lotfi B (2021) The determinants of organizational change management success: literature review and case study. Int J Eng Bus Manag 13:18479790211016270. https://doi.org/10.1177/18479790211016273
doi: 10.1177/18479790211016273
Abrams MJ, Golden DW, Huang GC (2023) A call for reform: variability and insufficiency in radiation oncology resident didactics-a brief report and national survey of program directors. J Cancer Educ 38(1):74–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-021-02080-5
doi: 10.1007/s13187-021-02080-5 pubmed: 34409581
Lanier MH, Wheeler CA, Ballard DH (2021) A new normal in radiology resident education: lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Radiographics 41(3):E71–E72. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2021210030
doi: 10.1148/rg.2021210030 pubmed: 33939548
Khan Q, Bowar B, Myers B, Kenjar F, Byrne JD, Gainey J (2024) Advancing resident education: experiential success in the creation of a comprehensive clinical didactic series in radiation oncology. Adv Radiat Oncol 9(5):101452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2024.101452
doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2024.101452 pubmed: 38590715 pmcid: 10999511
Berriochoa C, Weller M, Berry D, Reddy CA, Koyfman S, Tendulkar R (2017) Program director and chief resident perspectives on the educational environment of US radiation oncology programs. Pract Radiat Oncol 7(1):e65–e70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2016.06.001
doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2016.06.001 pubmed: 27523441
Bonwell CC, Eison JA (1991) Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, The George Washington University, and School of Education and Human Development
Glik DC, Parker K, Hategikamana GMB (2005) Integrating qualitative and quantitative survey techniques. Int Q Community Health Educ 25(1):115–133
doi: 10.2190/W18N-5210-0457-XJN7 pubmed: 17686698
WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Declaration. World Medical Association; 2013.  https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ . Accessed 23 Sept 2023
Dennis KE, Duncan G (2010) Radiation oncology in undergraduate medical education: a literature review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76(3):649–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.08.038
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.08.038 pubmed: 20159359
Baker SR, Romero MJ, Geannette C, Patel A (2009) The value of the internship for radiation oncology training: results of a survey of current and recent trainees. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74(4):1203–1206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.09.024
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.09.024 pubmed: 19135313
Ahmed S (2024) Innovation and discovery: a 30-year journey in advancing cancer care. Curr Oncol 31(4):2109–2111. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31040156
doi: 10.3390/curroncol31040156 pubmed: 38668059 pmcid: 11049086
Walls GM, Hanna GG, McAleer JJ (2020) Learning radiotherapy: the state of the art. BMC Med Educ 20(1):150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02054-z
doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02054-z pubmed: 32393250 pmcid: 7216702
Sandhu NK, Rahimy E, Hutten R et al (2023) Radiation Oncology Virtual Education Rotation (ROVER) 2.0 for residents: implementation and outcomes. J Cancer Educ 38(3):977–984. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-022-02216-1
doi: 10.1007/s13187-022-02216-1 pubmed: 36083458
Chaurasia AR, Page BR, Walker AJ et al (2021) Lessons to learn from a successful virtual mock oral examination pilot experience. Adv Radiat Oncol 6(1):100534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2020.07.011
doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.07.011 pubmed: 32838071
Hannan MT, Freeman J (1984) Structural inertia and organizational change. Am Sociol Rev 49(2):149–164. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095567
doi: 10.2307/2095567
Page CG (2002) The determination of organization stakeholder salience in public health. J Public Health Manag Pract 8(5):76–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/00124784-200209000-00009
doi: 10.1097/00124784-200209000-00009 pubmed: 15156650
McBeath A (2020) Doing quantitative research with a survey. In: Enjoying research in counselling and psychotherapy, pp 175–193. Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55127-8_10
Gürbüz S (2017) Survey as a quantitative research method. Res Methods Tech Public Relat Advert 2017:141–162
Thompson R (2012) Stakeholder analysis - stakeholder support for your projects. Mind Tools, 7. Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_07.htm
Hoff TJ, Witt LC (2000) Exploring the use of qualitative methods in published health services and management research. Med Care Res Rev 57(2):139–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/107755870005700201
doi: 10.1177/107755870005700201 pubmed: 10868070
Creswell JW (1999) Mixed-method research: introduction and application. In: Cizek GD (ed) Handbook of educational policy, pp 455–472. Elsevier
Migiro SO, Magangi B (2011) Mixed methods: a review of literature and the future of the new research paradigm. Afr J Bus Manage 5(10):3757–3764
Ivankova N, Wingo N (2018) Applying mixed methods in action research: methodological potentials and advantages. Am Behav Sci 62(7):978–997
doi: 10.1177/0002764218772673
Lundsgaard KS, Tolsgaard MG, Mortensen OS, Mylopoulos M, Ostergaard D (2019) Embracing multiple stakeholder perspectives in defining trainee competence. Acad Med 94(6):838–846. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002642
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002642 pubmed: 30730374
Stolk-Vos AC, van de Klundert JJ, Maijers N, Zijlmans BLM, Busschbach JJV (2017) Multi-stakeholder perspectives in defining health-services quality in cataract care. Int J Qual Health Care 29(4):470–476. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzx048
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx048 pubmed: 28498929
Lee L, Sheikh A (2016) Understanding stakeholder interests and perspectives in evaluations of health IT. Stud Health Technol Inform 222:53–62
pubmed: 27198092
Bergquist M, Rolandsson B, Gryska E et al (2023) Trust and stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of AI tools in clinical radiology. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09967-5
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-09967-5 pubmed: 37505245 pmcid: 10791850
Friesen MN, Yassi A, Cooper J (2001) Return-to-work: the importance of human interactions and organizational structures. Work 17(1):11–22
pubmed: 12441618

Auteurs

J M Bryant (JM)

Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. john.bryant@moffitt.org.

Kara C Madey (KC)

Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.

Stephen A Rosenberg (SA)

Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.

Jessica M Frakes (JM)

Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.

Sarah E Hoffe (SE)

Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. sarah.hoffe@moffitt.org.

Classifications MeSH