Maryellen E. Gusic

Functional Mentoring: A Practical Approach With Multilevel Outcomes

Introduction: Mentoring is a central component of professional development. Evaluation of “successful” mentoring programs, however, has been limited and mainly focused on measures of satisfaction with the relationship. In todays environment, mentoring programs must produce tangible outcomes to demonstrate success. To address this issue, the authors advance the framework of functional mentoring combined with measurement of outcomes at multiple levels. Methods: The mentoring program is embedded within an intensive, continuing medical education (CME) accredited faculty development program. Survey methodology is used to collect qualitative and quantitative data at the start, midpoint, and end of the program and longitudinally. Participants in 4 years of the program were surveyed. Results: In 4 years, 165 faculty participated in the program. Respondents were highly satisfied with the pairings: 85% of junior faculty believed their mentor had a significant effect on their projects. Junior faculty reported a significant enhancement of skills related to initiating and negotiating a new mentoring relationship (85%) and stated that their project would have a significant impact on their career (92%) and on the department or institution (86%). Discussion: The success of this mentoring program is demonstrated at multiple levels. The key outcome of functional mentoring is the project. Projects are aligned with professional responsibilities and with institutional missions. The project contributes to the individuals dossier and adds value to the institution. Functional mentoring is a practical approach that allows measurable results at multiple levels.

Analgesic Properties of Oral Sucrose During Routine Immunizations at 2 and 4 Months of Age

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the analgesic properties of oral sucrose during routine immunizations in infants at 2 and 4 months of age. PATIENTS AND METHODS. A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted at a pediatric ambulatory care clinic. One-hundred healthy term infants scheduled to receive routine immunizations were recruited, randomly stratified into 2- or 4-month study groups, and further randomly assigned to receive 24% oral sucrose and pacifier or the sterile water control solution. The study preparations were administered 2 minutes before the combined diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis, inactivated polio vaccine, and hepatitis B vaccine. Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine was administered 3 minutes after the combined injection, followed by the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, 2 minutes after the H influenzae type b injection. The University of Wisconsin Childrens Hospital Pain Scale measured serial acute pain responses for the treatment and control groups at baseline and 2, 5, 7, and 9 minutes after solution administration. Repeated-measures analysis of variance examined between-group differences and within-subject variability of treatment effect on overall pain scores. RESULTS. Two- and 4-month-old infants receiving oral sucrose (n = 38) displayed reductions in pain scores 2 minutes after solution administration compared with 2- and 4-month-old infants in the placebo group (n = 45). Between-group comparisons for the oral sucrose and placebo groups showed lower pain responses at 5, 7, and 9 minutes after solution administration. The oral sucrose and placebo groups demonstrated their highest mean pain score at 7 minutes, with a mean pain score of 3.8 and 4.8, respectively. At 9 minutes, the placebo group had a mean pain score of 2.91 whereas the mean pain score for the oral sucrose group returned to near baseline, reflecting a 78.5% difference in mean pain score (oral sucrose − placebo) relative to the placebo mean. CONCLUSIONS. Oral sucrose is an effective, easy-to-administer, short-acting analgesic for use during routine immunizations.

Teaching beliefs of medical educators: perspectives on clinical teaching in pediatrics

Background: Most who teach in clinical settings see themselves primarily as clinicians or physicians responsible for patient care and only secondarily as educators. The education literature suggests that teaching predominantly operates at a tacit level, where teachers rely on core beliefs to guide their practice, and actually spend little time in reflective practice. Given the lack of research on how medical educators in clinical settings view their teaching, the purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the teaching beliefs of faculty in a pediatrics department in a college of medicine. Methods: Using a Teaching Perspectives Inventory, observations and in-depth interviews, a complex picture was revealed about teaching beliefs of medical educators. Results: Due to contextual constraints of the clinical setting (e.g., time, competing stakeholders) that requires primary attention to patient care, they describe ‘teaching on the fly’. There is a strong emphasis on: delivering content; encouraging thinking among students; providing questioning and engaging learning experiences; and respecting students as learners. Conclusions: The implications of these beliefs are significant and indicate that faculty can benefit from opportunities that make their beliefs about teaching more conscious, particularly in determining how best to prepare future physicians to teach in clinical settings.

Guidelines for Evaluating the Educational Performance of Medical School Faculty: Priming a National Conversation

Background: The academic community needs a sound framework for the promotion and advancement of educators. The Group on Educational Affairs of the Association of American Medical Colleges organized a consensus conference that affirmed the use of five domains for documenting the quantity and quality of scholarly engagement in educational activities: teaching, curriculum, advising/mentoring, educational leadership/administration, and learner assessment. Summary: In this article, we offer detailed guidelines to evaluate these five domains of educator performance and the essential elements of scholarly activity. The guidelines are adapted from our developmental educator portfolio template and educator portfolio analysis tool, previously published in MedEdPORTAL. A short tool for educator performance evaluation that summarizes items in the guidelines is proposed for discussion. Conclusions: Our goal in this article is to itemize criteria for systematic faculty evaluation that can be applied in any institutional setting to assist promotion decision makers in their task of evaluating medical school faculty.

The essential value of projects in faculty development.

Projects--planned activities with specific goals and outcomes--have been used in faculty development programs to enhance participant learning and development. Projects have been employed most extensively in programs designed to develop faculty as educators. The authors review the literature and report the results of their 2008 study of the impact of projects within the Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine Junior Faculty Development Program, a comprehensive faculty development program. Using a mixed-methods approach, the products of project work, the academic productivity of program graduates, and the impact of projects on career development were analyzed. Faculty who achieved the most progress on their projects reported the highest number of academic products related to their project and the highest number of overall academic achievements. Faculty perceived that their project had three major effects on their professional development: production of a tangible outcome, development of a career focus, and development of relationships with mentors and peers. On the basis of these findings and a review of the literature, the authors conclude that projects are an essential element of a faculty development program. Projects provide a foundation for future academic success by enabling junior faculty to develop and hone knowledge and skills, identify a career focus and gain recognition within their community, generate scholarship, allocate time to academic work, and establish supportive relationships and collaborative networks. A list of best practices to successfully incorporate projects within faculty development programs is provided.

Evaluating the Performance of Medical Educators: A Novel Analysis Tool to Demonstrate the Quality and Impact of Educational Activities

Purpose Traditional promotion standards rely heavily on quantification of research grants and publications in the curriculum vitae. The promotion and retention of educators is challenged by the lack of accepted standards to evaluate the depth, breadth, quality, and impact of educational activities. The authors sought to develop a practical analysis tool for the evaluation of educator portfolios (EPs), based on measurable outcomes that allow reproducible analysis of the quality and impact of educational activities. Method The authors, 10 veteran educators and an external expert evaluator, used a scholarly, iterative consensus-building process to develop the tool and test it using real EPs from educational scholars who followed an EP template. They revised the template in parallel with the analysis tool to ensure that EP data enabled valid and reliable evaluation. The authors created the EP template and analysis tool for scholar and program evaluation in the Educational Scholars Program, a three-year national certification program of the Academic Pediatric Association. Results The analysis tool combines 18 quantitative and 25 qualitative items, with specifications, for objective evaluation of educational activities and scholarship. Conclusions The authors offer this comprehensive, yet practical tool as a method to enhance opportunities for faculty promotions and advancement, based on well-defined and documented educational outcome measures. It is relevant for clinical educators across disciplines and across institutions. Future studies will test the interrater reliability of the tool, using data from EPs written using the revised template.

Rural and Urban Children With Asthma: Are School Health Services Meeting Their Needs?

OBJECTIVE. Children with asthma spend a large portion of their day in school, and the extent to which public schools are prepared to meet their health needs is an important issue. The objective of this study was to identify asthma policies and practices in rural and urban school settings and to compare them with current National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute recommendations. METHODS. A stratified random sample of school nurses who represented each of the 500 active Pennsylvania school districts were surveyed in 2004 concerning nurse staffing patterns, availability of asthma monitoring and treatment-related equipment, emergency preparedness, availability of asthma-related support and case management services, school-specific procedures including identification of children with asthma and accessibility of inhaler medication during school hours, presence and content of written asthma management plans, and perceived obstacles to asthma management in the school setting. Sampling weights were incorporated into the analyses to take the survey design into account. RESULTS. The overall response rate was 76%, with a total of 757 surveys analyzed. In more than half of secondary schools and three quarters of elementary schools, nurses were present <40 hours per week. Nearly 1 in 5 schools reported that staff who know what to do for a severe asthma attack were not always available. In 72% of rural schools, children were allowed to self-carry rescue inhalers, as compared with 47% of urban schools. Asthma management plans were on file for only 1 quarter of children with asthma, and important information often was omitted. Approximately half of the schools were equipped with peak flow meters and nebulizers, and spacers were available in 1 third of schools. CONCLUSIONS. Improvements are needed to bring schools into compliance with current recommendations, including more consistent availability of knowledgeable staff, improved access to asthma monitoring and treatment-related equipment, more universal use of asthma management plans, and greater access to inhalers while at school, including increasing the proportion of children who are allowed to carry and self-administer inhaler medication.

Milestones of critical thinking: a developmental model for medicine and nursing.

Critical thinking is essential to a health professional’s competence to assess, diagnose, and care for patients. Defined as the ability to apply higher-order cognitive skills (conceptualization, analysis, evaluation) and the disposition to be deliberate about thinking (being open-minded or intellectually honest) that lead to action that is logical and appropriate, critical thinking represents a “meta-competency” that transcends other knowledge, skills, abilities, and behaviors required in health care professions. Despite its importance, the developmental stages of critical thinking have not been delineated for nurses and physicians. As part of a task force of educators who considered different developmental stage theories, the authors have iteratively refined and proposed milestones in critical thinking. The attributes associated with unreflective, beginning, practicing, advanced, accomplished, and challenged critical thinkers are conceived as independent of an individual’s level of training. Depending on circumstances and environmental factors, even the most experienced clinician may demonstrate attributes associated with a challenged thinker. The authors use the illustrative case of a patient with abdominal pain to demonstrate how critical thinking may manifest in learners at different stages of development, analyzing how the learner at each stage applies information obtained in the patient interaction to arrive at a differential diagnosis and plan for evaluation. The authors share important considerations and provide this work as a foundation for the development of effective approaches to teaching and promoting critical thinking and to establishing expectations for learners in this essential meta-competency.

Perspective: Toward a competency framework for faculty.

Today, faculty in academic medicine face challenges in all three mission areas--research, education, and patient care--and require a broad set of competencies to survive in this changing environment. To support faculty and to design assessments that match new expectations, the authors argue that it is essential to capture the full scope of skills, knowledge, and behaviors necessary for a successful faculty member. Thus, it is timely to explore and define competencies for faculty in academic medicine. The authors describe three approaches to identifying faculty competencies. Each reveals diverse but overlapping sets of competency domains, reflecting the breadth of activities expected of todays faculty. To organize these competencies into a coherent framework, the authors propose a model based on a typology of competency. A key feature of the model is the division between occupational competencies, which are largely role-specific, and personal competencies, which are necessary for all faculty. A competency framework also must be developmental, to reflect the growth in skills, knowledge, and behaviors from trainee to expert and to allow for an individuals changing roles over a career. Such a competency framework will inform professional development activities and require assessment of competence. The generation of competencies also will reveal areas of faculty practice that are poorly measured, requiring new tools to be incorporated into existing processes of faculty evaluation. The authors provide general principles to guide the identification of a competency framework for faculty and invite the academic medicine community to engage in further discussion.

Evaluating educators using a novel toolbox: applying rigorous criteria flexibly across institutions

Valuing faculty as educators is essential for medical schools to fulfill their unique mission of educating physicians. The 2006 Consensus Conference on Educational Scholarship, sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Group on Educational Affairs, provided educators seeking academic promotion with a portfolio-based format for documenting activities in five domains, using evidence of quantity, quality, a scholarly approach, and educational scholarship. Yet, the lack of a rigorous, widely accepted system to assess educator portfolio submissions during the promotion and tenure process continues to impede the ability to fully value educators and educational scholars. The AAMC Task Force on Educator Evaluation was formed in 2010 to establish consensus guidelines for use by those responsible for the rigorous evaluation of the educational contributions of faculty. The task force delineated the educational contributions currently valued by institutions and then fulfilled its charge by creating the Toolbox for Evaluating Educators, a resource which contains explicit evidence-based criteria to evaluate faculty in each of the five domains of educator activity. Adoption of such criteria is now the rate-limiting step in using a fair process to recognize educators through academic promotion. To inform institutional review and implementation of these criteria, this article describes the iterative, evidence- and stakeholder-based process to establish the criteria. The authors advocate institutional adoption of these criteria so that faculty seeking academic promotion as educators, like their researcher colleagues, can be judged and valued using established standards for the assessment of their work.