1 / 8

Alpha Test Site Panel

Alpha Test Site Panel. Spring PRODS Meeting March 4, 2013 LAC+USC Medical Center – Wesley Y. Naritoku Massachusetts General Hospital – W. Stephen Black-Schaffer The Methodist Hospital – Suzanne Z. Powell Vanderbilt Medical Center – Robert D. Hoffman. LAC+USC alpha-test experience.

colton
Download Presentation

Alpha Test Site Panel

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Alpha Test Site Panel Spring PRODS Meeting March 4, 2013 LAC+USC Medical Center – Wesley Y. Naritoku Massachusetts General Hospital – W. Stephen Black-Schaffer The Methodist Hospital – Suzanne Z. Powell Vanderbilt Medical Center – Robert D. Hoffman

  2. LAC+USC alpha-test experience • “NAS and Milestones” grand rounds • CCC = PD (ex officio) Assoc PD + 10 faculty members (4 AP, 6 CP including 1 PhD non-MD) • Overcoming inertia with implementation of something new, no previous experience – like first Whipple; more fluid with subsequent meetings • Milestones were identified where our residents wouldn’t achieve level 4; one PROF no progression • Meeting as CCC resulted in greater consistency in evaluation across the residency program • No complaints among residents (doing new self-evaluation) or among faculty participating in CCC

  3. MGH alpha-test experience • CCC = PD + AP and CP Assoc PDs + 2 SrAttendings + 1 Jr Attending (6 Members) • Need to get better alignment between the Milestones and end of rotation evaluations • For several of the Milestones our program presently wouldn't get residents to level 4 • Adding new programmatic elements may be easier because of national standards • Reviewing discordances between CCC and self-assessments is informative

  4. TMH alpha-test experience • Separate presentations on Milestones done for residents and faculty with residents performing self-assessments before faculty • CCC = PD + AP and CP Assoc PDs + 1 SrAttending + 2 Jr Attendings(6 Members) • Each CCC member performed evaluations of all residents individually prior to first meeting of the group • Hardest to assess PGY1’s since the previous experiences of trainees has been different (MD/PhD with research, or post-sophomore fellowship experience) • For several of the Milestones our program presently wouldn't get residents to level 4 – particularly evident in LM (residents self-evals correlate) • Reviewing discordances between CCC and resident self-assessments is informative • Will use resulting data as baseline for further comparisons • New Innovations evaluation form will be changed for use by all faculty to reflect the 29 Milestones

  5. Vandy alpha-test experience • CCC: PD as Chair, plus five members with demonstrated interest in GME, AP and CP represented equally as possible. • Resident self-assessment and CCC assessment blind to one another. • CCC evaluations were often subjective; room to improve objective assessment tools. • Four CCC meetings, one per class. Milestone by Milestone, not Resident by Resident. 12 minutes each resident on the average. • Self-assessments and CCC assessments were mostly concordant. There was more resident- induced- than Milestone-induced discordance .

  6. Suggested Graphical Representation

  7. Summary

  8. Open to Discussion

More Related