Cargando…
Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee
INTRODUCTION: In postgraduate medical education, group decision-making has emerged as an essential tool to evaluate the clinical progress of residents. Clinical competency committees (CCCs) have been set up to ensure informed decision-making and provide feedback regarding performance of residents. D...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6382624/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30656533 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0490-1 |
_version_ | 1783396686923563008 |
---|---|
author | Duitsman, Marrigje E. Fluit, Cornelia R. M. G. van Alfen-van der Velden, Janiëlle A. E. M. de Visser, Marieke ten Kate-Booij, Marianne Dolmans, Diana H. J. M. Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. de Graaf, Jacqueline |
author_facet | Duitsman, Marrigje E. Fluit, Cornelia R. M. G. van Alfen-van der Velden, Janiëlle A. E. M. de Visser, Marieke ten Kate-Booij, Marianne Dolmans, Diana H. J. M. Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. de Graaf, Jacqueline |
author_sort | Duitsman, Marrigje E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: In postgraduate medical education, group decision-making has emerged as an essential tool to evaluate the clinical progress of residents. Clinical competency committees (CCCs) have been set up to ensure informed decision-making and provide feedback regarding performance of residents. Despite this important task, it remains unclear how CCCs actually function in practice and how their performance should be evaluated. METHODS: In the prototyping phase of a design-based approach, a CCC meeting was developed, using three theoretical design principles: (1) data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, (2) a shared mental model and (3) structured discussions. The meetings were held in a university children’s hospital and evaluated using observations, interviews with CCC members and an open-ended questionnaire among residents. RESULTS: The structured discussions during the meetings provided a broad outline of resident performance, including identification of problematic and excellent residents. A shared mental model about the assessment criteria had developed over time. Residents were not always satisfied with the feedback they received after the meeting. Feedback that had been provided to a resident after the first CCC meeting was not addressed in the second meeting. DISCUSSION: The principles that were used to design the CCC meeting were feasible in practice. Structured discussions, based on data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, provided a broad outline of resident performance. Residency programs that wish to implement CCCs can build on our design principles and adjust the prototype to their particular context. When running a CCC, it is important to consider feedback that has been provided to a resident after the previous meeting and to evaluate whether it has improved the resident’s performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40037-018-0490-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6382624 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Bohn Stafleu van Loghum |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63826242019-03-10 Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee Duitsman, Marrigje E. Fluit, Cornelia R. M. G. van Alfen-van der Velden, Janiëlle A. E. M. de Visser, Marieke ten Kate-Booij, Marianne Dolmans, Diana H. J. M. Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. de Graaf, Jacqueline Perspect Med Educ Original Article INTRODUCTION: In postgraduate medical education, group decision-making has emerged as an essential tool to evaluate the clinical progress of residents. Clinical competency committees (CCCs) have been set up to ensure informed decision-making and provide feedback regarding performance of residents. Despite this important task, it remains unclear how CCCs actually function in practice and how their performance should be evaluated. METHODS: In the prototyping phase of a design-based approach, a CCC meeting was developed, using three theoretical design principles: (1) data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, (2) a shared mental model and (3) structured discussions. The meetings were held in a university children’s hospital and evaluated using observations, interviews with CCC members and an open-ended questionnaire among residents. RESULTS: The structured discussions during the meetings provided a broad outline of resident performance, including identification of problematic and excellent residents. A shared mental model about the assessment criteria had developed over time. Residents were not always satisfied with the feedback they received after the meeting. Feedback that had been provided to a resident after the first CCC meeting was not addressed in the second meeting. DISCUSSION: The principles that were used to design the CCC meeting were feasible in practice. Structured discussions, based on data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, provided a broad outline of resident performance. Residency programs that wish to implement CCCs can build on our design principles and adjust the prototype to their particular context. When running a CCC, it is important to consider feedback that has been provided to a resident after the previous meeting and to evaluate whether it has improved the resident’s performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40037-018-0490-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2019-01-17 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6382624/ /pubmed/30656533 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0490-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Duitsman, Marrigje E. Fluit, Cornelia R. M. G. van Alfen-van der Velden, Janiëlle A. E. M. de Visser, Marieke ten Kate-Booij, Marianne Dolmans, Diana H. J. M. Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. de Graaf, Jacqueline Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title | Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title_full | Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title_fullStr | Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title_full_unstemmed | Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title_short | Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
title_sort | design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6382624/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30656533 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0490-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT duitsmanmarrigjee designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT fluitcorneliarmg designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT vanalfenvanderveldenjanielleaem designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT devissermarieke designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT tenkatebooijmarianne designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT dolmansdianahjm designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT jaarsmadebbieadc designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee AT degraafjacqueline designandevaluationofaclinicalcompetencycommittee |