Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_112_библиотеки_им_акад_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
05.09.2026
Размер:
18 Мб
Скачать
be required as long as needed.
Finally, another form of an entrustment decision is the scheduled or planned entrustment. For example, many postgraduate medical education programs use night float systems where learners cover patient services overnight, often without direct faculty supervision (e.g., on-site supervision) being readily available. These night float rotations are usually baked into the learners’ rotational schedule regardless of whether they are truly ready for this responsibility. This “level 4” entrustment decision is sometimes called “level 4a,” meaning that a supervisor is on call and accessible through telephone if needed. As another example, changes in supervision are often based on the learner’s year of postgraduate training regardless of whether the learner is truly ready. These types of entrustment decisions should ideally be based on robust assessment data and treated more as a summative type of assessment. In fact, entrustment decisions based on merely the time period in training contradicts the philosophy of competency-based education.
Use Multiple Sources of Information to Support Entrustment Decisions
While ad hoc decisions to trust a trainee are usually taken by individuals and are very much situated in time and place, summative and planned entrustment decisions must be grounded in multiple identifiable sources of information (Table 1.7). The sources of information to inform entrustment decisions are not necessarily different for other WBAs.
Chapter 3 provides guidance on programmatic assessment.
https://t.me/med1917
Table 1.7
Sources of Information to Support Summative Entrustment Decisions
Sources Examples
1. Knowledge testing
Written or e-tests, case-based discussions, assessment of clinical reasoning in vivo, case­based discussions, chart-stimulated recall
2. Short practice observations
Mini-CEX, DOPS, handoffs, video, and other (119)
3. Long practice observations
Multisource feedback, review of shifts and rotations, daily shift cards
4. Simulation tests
OSCE, OSATS,a standardized patient tests
5. Work product evaluation
EHR entries, presentations, papers, reports, event analysis, review of quality and safety performance measures
a
Can also be used as a direct observation tool.
CEX, Clinical evaluation exercise; DOPS, direct observation of procedural skills; EHR, electronic health record; OSATS, objective structured assessment of technical skill; OSCE, objective structured clinical examination.
Entrustment Is an Approach to Assessment Requiring a Prospective Outlook
In most of education, the primary question is: Has the student met all the objectives and requirements that a school or program has set? In health professions education, an important additional question is: Is the learner ready to be licensed for practice? This essentially is an entrustment question. It is a question that forces one to stop and think of
https://t.me/med1917
future situations, and not just look back at what a learner has done. Schools, programs, and clinical educators should, for instance, not graduate health professionals if they would not
trust them to attend to their own family members.
175
Making entrustment decisions for smaller units of practice than a license means both weighing everything that is important for autonomous practice and a deliberate willingness to accept the risks that adverse events could happen. The breadth of healthcare with which graduates are entrusted may be more than supervisors have been able to observe, and could even be more than the graduate has encountered in training. This requires a shift in traditional thinking, from retrospective to prospective, and arguably even extending the “does” level of Miller’s pyramid. Ready to be trusted with unfamiliar
situations has led to suggest a fifth level of the pyramid
176
(see Fig. 1.12).
FIG. 1.12 “Extended” Miller’s pyramid with entrustment.
https://t.me/med1917
The evaluation of learners at this level includes features that many clinicians have acknowledged as important when trusting them with critical care tasks. Ten Cate and Chen reviewed several studies with this focus and concluded that, besides specific capability (knowledge and skill, experience, adaptive expertise), additional areas to assess include reliability (conscientious, predictable, accountable, responsible), integrity (truthful, good intentions, patient centered), humility (observing limits, willing to ask for help, receptive to feedback), and agency (self-confident; proactive toward work, team, safety, and development). To remember this with an acronym, they suggested thinking, prospectively, of A RICH entrustment decision (A = Agency; R = Reliability;
I = Integrity; C = Capability; H = Humility).
177
Systems of Assessment
(See Chapters 3 and 18.)
As the section on Competency milestones and EPAs clearly highlights, regardless of whether your program decides to utilize these developmental concepts, all medical education programs need a robust assessment program (i.e., programmatic assessment) using a multifaceted array of assessment methods embedded in an effective educational system. The movement toward outcomes-based education and assessment presents many challenges for medical educators. Educational leaders will need to integrate traditional and new assessment methods into their educational programs to ensure that individual trainees meet important educational and professional goals and to inform continued quality improvement of their programs. Assessment approaches must be clearly aligned with
https://t.me/med1917
educational objectives and congruent with teaching and learning methods as highlighted by the core components framework. Assessment should be closely intertwined with instructional activities to optimize efficient use of resources and to consolidate learning. The assessment system will need to include multiple methods to capture each general competency and ideally to provide for the assessment of different aspects of each competency by different methods. Program and clerkship directors will need to prepare the assessors, through implementation of robust faculty development programs, and inform and engage trainees for the assessment system to succeed.
Beyond the performance of individual trainees, the assessment system will need to support the continuous collection and analysis of aggregate data to provide feedback regarding the quality of the educational program. This includes information from more traditional assessment methods, such as program-level subscores on MCQ examinations or aggregate case–level data from clinical skills examinations, as well as composite scores or ratings from newer methods such as multisource feedback, computer simulation–based exercises, and a robust combination of work-based assessments. It also involves collection and analysis of clinical information, such as adherence with evidence-based healthcare processes or patient health outcomes that can provide the impetus for curricular change or feedback on the quality of educational interventions. Establishing such a connection, at least at the institutional level, will facilitate conduct of needed research to elucidate the relationships between educational activities and healthcare practices and outcomes. Competency milestones and EPAs were created to facilitate this integration and
https://t.me/med1917
connection.
In addition to compiling aggregate data within programs to inform quality improvement initiatives, assessment systems will need to enable information gathering regarding the performance of program graduates. As with concurrent measures, educational leaders will need to access and incorporate into their assessment systems information about the performance of the program’s graduates to guide quality improvement efforts (see Chapter 18). Some information, such as licensure actions, in-training or board certification examination scores, or program director ratings, is available in some jurisdictions. For example, medical schools in the United States can access their graduates’ first-year competency milestones data as one measure. Obtaining other sources of information, such as specific performance measures or clinical data, to provide additional feedback regarding educational program quality will require more effort. The formation of collaborative projects and networks linking professional and clinical outcomes across the spectrum of education and practice will facilitate understanding and incorporation of information critical to the continuous quality improvement of educational programs.
Conclusion
Public and professional pressure to increase accountability and quality improvement in clinical care has resulted in important changes in medical education and assessment. Delineation of essential physician competencies and widespread implementation of outcomes-based medical education, to varying degrees, has led to a critical review of
https://t.me/med1917
the quality and methods used in the assessment of competence and performance. Advances in technology and psychometrics have supported continued refinement of traditional assessment modalities and the development of new approaches. Educational leaders now face challenges in developing and integrating assessment programs embedded within an effective system and overall educational program. The core components framework is a good place for
programs to start examining their own “outcomeness”
42
(see
Appendix 1.3
for worksheet). They must understand the psychometric and utility properties of various assessment tools, consider their relevance to trainee level as well as to instructional methods and educational objectives, and then balance these factors against program culture and resource availability in deciding what methods to use in their assessment system. Educators need to understand the evolving science of workplace-based assessment such as quality and safety measures, patient experience surveys, and PROMs. The use of qualitative assessments and judgment techniques, combined with group process, is also growing in importance for assessment programs. Finally, health professions educators must understand and use systems thinking (see Chapters 3 and 18). The chapters that follow are intended to help guide educational leaders in designing their assessment programs and systems to support evaluation of individual trainees and continuous quality improvement of their educational programs for the benefit of the trainee, program, and most importantly, patients and the public.
Acknowledgments
https://t.me/med1917
The authors wish to sincerely thank Dr. John Norcini for donating content from the first edition to this chapter. Finally, we wish to thank Dr. Rich Hawkins, one of the book’s editors of the first and second editions. We are very appreciative of their graciousness and contributions to previous versions of this chapter and their contributions to medical education.
References
1. Hill L, Ndugga N, Artiga S. Key data on health and health care by race and ethnicity. Kaiser Family Foundation. Accessed March 19, 2023. at Key Data on Health and Health Care by Race and Ethnicity | KFF.
https://www.who.int/data/stories/global­excess-deaths-associated-with-covid-19­january-2020-december-2021.
2. World Health Organization. Global excess deaths associated with COVID-19, January 2020 to December 2021. Accessed March 19,
2023. at Global excess deaths associated with COVID-19, January 2020 – December 2021 (Global excess deaths associated with COVID­19, January 2020 - December 2021 (who.int)).
https://www.economist.com/graphic­detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-estimates.
3. The Economist. The pandemic’s true death toll. Accessed March 19, 2023. at The pandemic’s true death toll | The Economist. (The pandemic’s true death toll
https://t.me/med1917
(economist.com)).
https://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Publications/Free- from-Harm-Accelerating-Patient-Safety­Improvement.aspx
4. Institute of Medicine. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academy of Health Sciences; 1999.
5. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm. National Academy Press; 2001.
6. Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington L. The triple aim: care, health cost. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008 May-Jun;27(3):759-769. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759.
7. Bodenheimer T, Sinsky C. From triple to quadruple aim: care of the patient requires care of the provider. Ann Fam Med. 2014 Nov­Dec;12(6):573-576. doi:10.1370/afm.1713.
8. Nundy S, Cooper LA, Mate KS. The quintuple aim for health care improvement: a new imperative to advance health equity. JAMA. 2022 Feb 8;327(6):521–522. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.25181.
9. National Patient Safety Foundation. Free from Harm: Accelerating Patient Safety Improvement Fifteen Years after To Err Is Human. May 28, 2016. Accessed September 30,
2023. Free from Harm: Accelerating Patient Safety Improvement Fifteen Years after To Err Is Human | IHI - Institute for Healthcare Improvement.
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sites/default/files/2020-
https://t.me/med1917
12/International_Profiles_of_Health_Care_Systems_Dec2020.pdf
10. Commonwealth Fund. 2020 International Profiles of Health Care Systems. Tikkanen R, Osborn R, Mossialos E, Djordjevic A, Wharton G, eds. Accessed March 19, 2023. at International Profiles of Health Care Systems: Australia, Canada, China, Denmark, England, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States (commonwealthfund.org).
https://www.gmc-uk.org/­/media/documents/good-medical-practice­english-20200128_pdf-51527435.pdf? la=en&hash=DA1263358CCA88F298785FE2BD7610EB4EE9A530
11. World Health Organization. World health statistics 2022: monitoring health for the SDGs, sustainable development goals. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. License: CC BY-NC­SA 3.0 IGO. Accessed March 19, 2023. 9789240051140-eng.pdf.[]:AU: ref 11, please replace highlighted text with full URL.
12. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010 Dec 4;376(9756):1923-1958. doi:10.1016/S0140-
6736(10)61854-5.
13. Harden RM, Crosby JR, Davis M. An introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teacher. 1999;21(1): 7–14.
https://t.me/med1917