Association of Academic Physiatry
Download
1 / 12

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 187 Views
  • Updated On :

Association of Academic Physiatry San Diego, CA. March 3, 2000 David W. Musick, Ph.D. Susan M. McDowell, M.D. University of Kentucky College of Medicine Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '' - adamdaniel


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

Association of Academic Physiatry

San Diego, CA. March 3, 2000

David W. Musick, Ph.D.

Susan M. McDowell, M.D.

University of Kentucky College of Medicine

Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Evaluating Residents’ Clinical Skills & Professionalism via the PM&R Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (CEX)


How to evaluate clinical competence l.jpg
How to Evaluate Clinical Competence?

  • K-S-A Triad (Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes)

  • Should ideally use multiple methods

  • Prominent issue for accreditation by RRC

    • Must “link” evaluation methods with educational objectives

    • Educational outcomes: better patient health, acceptable risk management, greater customer satisfaction

    • ACGME Core Competency project


Evaluate clinical competence via rating scale format l.jpg
Evaluate Clinical Competence via Rating Scale Format

  • Clinical Competence: often based heavily on ratings of performance

  • Assumption: that individual resident performance is observed personally by attending physician(s) completing forms

  • Medical education literature reveals that such scales may have poor reliability and are often based on limited personal observation of performance


Pilot project pm r mini cex ratings format l.jpg
Pilot Project: PM&R “Mini-CEX” Ratings Format

  • “Mini-CEX”: brief encounter w patients in either inpatient/outpatient settings

  • Goal: to emphasize evaluation of residents’ performance based on “real time” observation by attending faculty

  • Modeled new form after successful “clinical evaluation exercise” format used by Internal Medicine


Pm r mini cex ratings format eight items l.jpg

Overall clinical competence (global)

History-taking skills

Physical exam skills

Clinical diagnostic skills

Clinical judgment & synthesis skills

Patient management skills

Communication skills

Humanistic qualities (professionalism)

PM&R “Mini-CEX” Ratings Format: Eight Items


Pilot project pm r mini cex ratings format6 l.jpg

Data collection for pilot study took place over two academic years

14 residents rated in 10 different rotations (7 inpatient, 3 outpatient)

11 different faculty

Total N=31 ratings forms

All items on Likert-type scale (1 to 9)

Primary diagnosis, faculty satisfaction

Pilot Project: PM&R “Mini-CEX” Ratings Format


Pilot project results descriptive statistics l.jpg

Mean rating all residents = 6.97 (SD=1.09; SEM=0.19) years

Average ratings higher for female residents (7.48) than for male residents (6.50)

Higher ratings for residents in outpatient rotations (7.14) than inpatient rotations (6.92)

Range: hi = 7.35 (humanistic qualities); lo = 6.81 (clinical diagnostic skills)

Pilot Project Results: Descriptive Statistics


Pilot project results descriptive statistics8 l.jpg

Mean inter-item correlation = .69; range from hi = .88 to lo = .41

Alpha reliability = .95

Residents interacted with patients who were diagnosed with nine different clinical conditions

Faculty satisfaction with ratings format was high (7.25)

Pilot Project Results: Descriptive Statistics


Pilot project limitations conclusions l.jpg

LIMITATIONS = .41

Based on very small sample size

More rigorous analyses require larger sample

Based primarily on PGY-2 residents

CONCLUSIONS

Easy to use, acceptable to faculty

Brief but focused format

Allows for good formative feedback

Can supplement other methods of evaluation

Pilot Project Limitations & Conclusions


Recommendations l.jpg
Recommendations = .41

  • Drs. Scott & Blake, AAP 1998: “proactive establishment of specialty-wide critical competencies” and corresponding evaluative methods

  • Further refinement/testing of PM&R mini-CEX on national basis

  • Actively seeking other PM&R residency programs to collaborate on project


Future plans l.jpg
Future Plans = .41

  • Continue refinements of instrument

    • Addition of patient gender as variable

    • Feasibility of electronic data collection

      • Scannable “bubble” sheet format

      • Web-based format

    • Add qualitative comments section


Future plans12 l.jpg
Future Plans = .41

  • Expand data collection to other PMR Programs

  • Consider collaboration with specialty board to eventually establish use of mini-CEX across all PM&R residency training programs


ad