Stephanie Call

Toward Defining the Foundation of the MD Degree: Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency.

Currently, no standard defines the clinical skills that medical students must demonstrate upon graduation. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education bases its standards on required subject matter and student experiences rather than on observable educational outcomes. The absence of such established outcomes for MD graduates contributes to the gap between program directors’ expectations and new residents’ performance. In response, in 2013, the Association of American Medical Colleges convened a panel of experts from undergraduate and graduate medical education to define the professional activities that every resident should be able to do without direct supervision on day one of residency, regardless of specialty. Using a conceptual framework of entrustable professional activities (EPAs), this Drafting Panel reviewed the literature and sought input from the health professions education community. The result of this process was the publication of 13 core EPAs for entering residency in 2014. Each EPA includes a description, a list of key functions, links to critical competencies and milestones, and narrative descriptions of expected behaviors and clinical vignettes for both novice learners and learners ready for entrustment. The medical education community has already begun to develop the curricula, assessment tools, faculty development resources, and pathways to entrustment for each of the 13 EPAs. Adoption of these core EPAs could significantly narrow the gap between program directors’ expectations and new residents’ performance, enhancing patient safety and increasing residents’, educators’, and patients’ confidence in the care these learners provide in the first months of their residency training.

Anticipated Consequences of the 2011 Duty Hours Standards: Views of Internal Medicine and Surgery Program Directors

Purpose To assess internal medicine (IM) and surgery program directors’ views of the likely effects of the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hours regulations. Method In fall 2010, investigators surveyed IM and surgery program directors, assessing their views of the likely impact of the 2011 duty hours standards on learning environment, workload, education opportunities, program administration, and patient outcomes. Results Of 381 IM program directors, 287 (75.3%) responded; of 225 surgery program directors, 118 (52.4%) responded. Significantly more surgeons than internists indicated that the new regulations would likely negatively impact learning climate, including faculty morale and residents’ relationships (P < .001). Most leaders in both specialties (80.8% IM, 80.2% surgery) felt that the regulations would likely increase faculty workload (P = .73). Both IM (82.2%) and surgery (96.6%) leaders most often rated, of all education opportunities, first-year resident clinical experience to be adversely affected (P < .001). Respondents from both specialties indicated that they will hire more nonphysician/midlevel providers (59.5% IM, 89.0% surgery, P < .001) and use more nonteaching services (66.8% IM, 70.1% surgery, P = .81). Respondents expect patient safety (45.1% IM, 76.9% surgery, P < .001) and continuity of care (83.6% IM across all training levels, 97.5% surgery regarding first-year residents) to decrease. Conclusions IM and surgery program directors agree that the 2011 duty hours regulations will likely negatively affect the quality of the learning environment, workload, education opportunities, program administration, and patient outcomes. Careful evaluation of actual impact is important.

Impact of Resident Workload and Handoff Training on Patient Outcomes

Impact of Resident Workload and Handoff Training on Patient Outcomes Stephanie K. Mueller, MD, Stephanie A. Call, MD, MSPH, Furman S. McDonald, MD, MPH, Andrew J. Halvorsen, MS, Jeffrey L. Schnipper, MD, MPH, LeRoi S. Hicks, MD, MPH Brigham and Women’s-Faulkner Hospital Academic Hospitalist Service, Boston, Mass; Division of General Internal edicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Mass; Division of General Internal Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond; Divisions of General and Hospital Internal Medicine and Office of Educational Innovations, Internal Medicine Residency, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn; Division of Hospital Medicine, UMass Memorial Healthcare, Worcester; Department of Quantitative Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester.

Challenges with Continuity Clinic and Core Faculty Accreditation Requirements

AAIM is the largest academically focused specialty organization representing departments of internal medicine at medical schools and teaching hospitals in the United States and Canada. As a consortium of five organizations, AAIM represents department chairs and chiefs; clerkship, residency, and fellowship program directors; division chiefs; and academic and business administrators as well as other faculty and staff in departments of internal medicine and their divisions.

Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors' Views of the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency: An Opportunity to Enhance Communication of Competency Along the Continuum.

Purpose To examine internal medicine (IM) residency program directors’ (PDs’) perspectives on the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency (Core EPAs)—introduced into undergraduate medical education to further competency-based assessment—and on communicating competency-based information during transitions. Method A spring 2015 Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine survey asked PDs of U.S. IM residency programs for their perspectives on which Core EPAs new interns must or should possess on day 1, which are most essential, and which have the largest gap between expected and observed performance. Their views and preferences were also requested regarding communicating competency-based information at transitions from medical school to residency and residency to fellowship/employment. Results The response rate was 57% (204/361 programs). The majority of PDs felt new interns must/should possess 12 of the 13 Core EPAs. PDs’ rankings of Core EPAs by relative importance were more varied than their rankings by the largest gaps in performance. Although preferred timing varied, most PDs (82%) considered it important for medical schools to communicate Core EPA-based information to PDs; nearly three-quarters (71%) would prefer a checklist format. Many (60%) would be willing to provide competency-based evaluations to fellowship directors/employers. Most (> 80%) agreed that there should be a bidirectional communication mechanism for programs/employers to provide feedback on competency assessments. Conclusions The gaps identified in Core EPA performance may help guide medical schools’ curricular and assessment tool design. Sharing competency-based information at transitions along the medical education continuum could help ensure production of competent, practice-ready physicians.

Guidelines for Writing Department of Medicine Summary Letters

AAIM is the largest academically focused specialty organization representing departments of internal medicine at medical schools and teaching hospitals in the United States and Canada. As a consortium of five organizations, AAIM represents department chairs and chiefs; clerkship, residency, and fellowship program directors; division chiefs; and academic and business administrators as well as other faculty and staff in departments of internal medicine and their divisions.

Update in Internal Medicine Residency Education: A Review of the Literature in 2010 and 2011

BACKGROUND Evidence-based practice in education requires high-quality evidence, and many in the medical education community have called for an improvement in the methodological quality of education research. OBJECTIVE Our aim was to use a valid measure of medical education research quality to highlight the methodological quality of research publications and provide an overview of the recent internal medicine (IM) residency literature. METHODS We searched MEDLINE and PreMEDLINE to identify English-language articles published in the United States and Canada between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011, focusing on IM residency education. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI), which has demonstrated reliability and validity. Qualitative articles were excluded. Articles were ranked by quality score, and the top 25% were examined for common themes, and 2 articles within each theme were selected for in-depth presentation. RESULTS The search identified 731 abstracts of which 223 articles met our inclusion criteria. The mean (±SD) MERSQI score of the 223 studies included in the review was 11.07 (±2.48). Quality scores were highest for data analysis (2.70) and lowest for study design (1.41) and validity (1.29). The themes identified included resident well-being, duty hours and resident workload, career decisions and gender, simulation medicine, and patient-centered outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Our review provides an overview of the IM medical education literature for 2010-2011, highlighting 5 themes of interest to the medical education community. Study design and validity are 2 areas where improvements in methodological quality are needed, and authors should consider these when designing research protocols.

Changes in the National Residency Matching Program Policy: Are Internal Medicine Program Directors “All-In”?

Michael Adams, MD, FACP, is Program Director of Medicine at Georgetown University; Thomas B. Morrison, MD, is Fellow in Cardiovascular Medicine at Vanderbilt University; Stephanie Call, MD, is Program Director of Medicine at Virginia Commonwealth University; Andrew J. Halvorsen, MS, is Biostatistician and Project and Data Manager in the Internal Medicine Residency Office of Educational Innovations at Mayo Clinic; Jared Moore, MD, is Chief Medical Resident in Internal Medicine at Ohio State University; Maria Lucarelli, MD, is Associate Program Director in Internal Medicine at Ohio State University; Steven Angus, MD, is Program Director of Medicine at the University of Connecticut Health Center; and Furman S. McDonald, MD, MPH, is Program Director of Internal Medicine Residency Office of Educational Innovations at the Mayo Clinic. Funding: This study was supported in part by the Mayo Clinic Internal Medicine Residency Office of Educational Innovations as part of the ACGME Educational Innovations Project. The Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center provided assistance with the survey design and data collection. We are grateful for the support of the Association of Program Directors of Internal Medicine and the members of the Survey Committee and to the residency program directors who completed the Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) survey. While we are reporting the results of the APDIM Survey Committee, we are not presuming to speak for the organization and our paper does not constitute an official policy statement of APDIM, the APDIM Council, or any other organzation with which any of the authors may be affiliated.

US Internal Medicine Program Director Perceptions of Alignment of Graduate Medical Education and Institutional Resources for Engaging Residents in Quality and Safety

Alignment between institutions and graduate medical education (GME) regarding quality and safety initiatives (QI) has not been measured. The objective was to determine US internal medicine residency program directors’ (IM PDs) perceived resourcing for QI and alignment between GME and their institutions. A national survey of IM PDs was conducted in the Fall of 2013. Multivariable linear regression was used to test association between a novel Integration Score (IS) measuring alignment between GME and the institution via PD perceptions. The response rate was 72.6% (265/365). According to PDs, residents were highly engaged in QI (82%), but adequate funding (14%) and support personnel (37% to 61%) were lower. Higher IS correlated to reports of funding for QI (76.3% vs 54.5%, P = .012), QI personnel (67.3% vs 41.1%, P < .001), research experts (70.5% vs 50.0%, P < .001), and computer experts (69.0% vs 45.8%, P < .001) for QI assistance. Apparent mismatch between GME and institutional resources exists, and the IS may be useful in measuring GME–institutional leadership alignment in QI.

Competency-Based Medical Education in the Internal Medicine Clerkship: A Report From the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Undergraduate Medical Education Task Force

As medical educators continue to redefine learning and assessment across the continuum, implementation of competency-based medical education in the undergraduate setting has become a focus of many medical schools. While standards of competency have been defined for the graduating student, there is no uniform approach for defining competency expectations for students during their core clerkship year. The authors describe the process by which an Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine task force developed a paradigm for competency-based assessment of students during their inpatient internal medicine (IM) clerkship. Building on work at the resident and fellowship levels, the task force focused on the development of key learning outcomes as defined by entrustable professional activities (EPAs) that were specific to educational experiences on the IM clerkship, as well as identification of high-priority assessment domains. The work was informed by a national survey of clerkship directors.Six key EPAs emerged: generating a differential diagnosis, obtaining a complete and accurate history and physical exam, obtaining focused histories and clinically relevant physical exams, preparing an oral presentation, interpreting the results of basic diagnostic studies, and providing well-organized clinical documentation. A model for assessment was proposed, with descriptors aligned to the scale of supervision and mapped to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education domains of competence. The proposed paradigm offers a standardized template that may be used across IM clerkships, and which would effectively bridge competency evaluation in the clerkship to fourth-year assessment as well as eventual postgraduate training.