1329. Beyond Reporting: Using an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestone-Linked Evaluation System to Improve Clinical Infectious Diseases Rotations for Baylor College of Medicine Internal Medicine (BCM IM) Residents

BACKGROUND: ACGME requires reporting of trainee performance on specialty-specific “milestones.” Online evaluation platforms facilitate reporting by linking evaluation questions to these milestones. Whether a milestone-linked evaluation system can be used to identify educational strengths and weaknesses within a training program has not been reported. METHODS: In 2016, the BCM IM residency program implemented a milestone-linked evaluation system to increase transparency to residents regarding educational goals and streamline milestone reporting. Residents are evaluated on rotation-specific educational objectives; scores range from 1 to 5 (Figure 1), or “not observed” if the skill was not observed during the rotation. Evaluation data from residents on infectious diseases (ID) rotations between 2016 and 2018 were analyzed to compare performance by post-graduate year (PGY) and to assess curricular strengths and deficiencies. RESULTS: Two hundred five inpatient and 43 ambulatory ID rotation evaluations were analyzed. In the inpatient setting, mean scores for PGY-1, -2, and -3 trainees were 2.62, 3.06, and 3.88. Residents scored highly on communicating consult recommendations and collecting data from the health record. Residents received lower scores on identifying infections associated with immune deficiencies and in knowledge of antimicrobial spectrum/indications. In the ambulatory setting, mean scores for PGY-2 and -3 trainees were 3.44 and 3.61. Relative to the inpatient setting, more objectives on ambulatory rotations were rated as “not observed.” Objectives with high rates of “not observed” ratings included managing infections in returning travelers (70%); testing/treating latent tuberculosis (63%); interpreting viral hepatitis studies (31%); and managing sexually transmitted infections (25%). CONCLUSION: Data from a milestone-linked evaluation system identified educational strengths and weaknesses of clinical ID experiences for internal medicine residents. Objectives with consistently low or “not observed” ratings may be judged as educational deficiencies, and should prompt modifications to the curriculum to provide increased clinical exposure and/or dedicated didactics to help residents develop these important skills. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.