The Assessment of Pathologists/Laboratory Medicine Physicians Through a Multisource Feedback Tool by ProQuest


More Info
									      The Assessment of Pathologists/Laboratory Medicine
        Physicians Through a Multisource Feedback Tool
                  Jocelyn M. Lockyer, PhD; Claudio Violato, PhD; Herta Fidler, MSc; Pauline Alakija, MD, FRCPC

● Context.—There is increasing interest in ensuring that                 ability of the internal consistency, measured by Cronbach
physicians demonstrate the full range of Accreditation                     , was .95 for the full scale of all instruments. Analysis
Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies.                     indicated that the medical peer, referring physician, and
   Objective.—To determine whether it is possible to de-                 coworker instruments achieved a generalizability coeffi-
velop a feasible and reliable multisource feedback instru-               cient of .78, .81, and .81, respectively. Factor analysis
ment for pathologists and laboratory medicine physicians.                showed 4 factors on the peer questionnaire accounted for
   Design.—Surveys with 39, 30, and 22 items were devel-                 68.8% of the total variance: reports and clinical compe-
oped to assess individual physicians by 8 peers, 8 referring             tency, collaboration, educational leadership, and profes-
physicians, and 8 coworkers (eg, technologists, secretar-                sional behavior. For the referring physician survey, 3 fac-
ies), respectively, using 5-point scales and an unable-to-
                                                                         tors accounted for 66.9% of the variance: professionalism,
assess category. Physicians completed a self-assessment
survey. Items addressed key competencies related to clin-                reports, and clinical competency. Two factors on the co-
ical competence, collaboration, professionalism, and com-                worker questionnaire accounted for 59.9% of the total
munication.                                                              variance: communication and professionalism.
   Results.—Data from 101 pathologists and laboratory                       Conclusions.—It is feasible to assess this group of phy-
medicine physicians were analyzed. The mean number of                    sicians using multisource feedback with instruments that
respondents per physician was 7.6, 7.4, and 7.6 for peers,               are reliable.
referring physicians, and coworkers, respectively. The reli-                (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:1301–1308)

I n the United States and Canada, the Accreditation Coun-
    cil for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) compe-
tencies1 and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons
                                                                         entists proposed a curriculum to define goals and objec-
                                                                         tives for training, provide guidelines for instructional
                                                                         methods, and provide some examples of how outcomes
of Canada CanMEDS roles2 are established, key parame-                    can be assessed.4 It suggested that assessment tools might
ters for performance in practice. The ACGME competen-                    include record reviews, checklists, global ratings, simula-
cies are patient care, medical knowledge, practice-based                 tions, 360 global ratings, portfolios, standardized oral ex-
learning and improvement, interpersonal and communi-                     aminations, written examinations, and procedure/case
cation skills, professionalism, and system-based care.1 The              logs.4
CanMEDS roles include medical expert, scholar, commu-                       Both education and assessment tools have begun to be
nicator, collaborator, professional, manager, and health                 developed in response. For example, the Mayo Clinic in
advocate.2                                                               Rochester, Minnesota, created a basic-competency leader-
   These competencies for practice have stimulated a new                 ship and management program for its residents and fel-
look within and across medicine for both practitioners and               lows.5 The Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, Michigan, has
physicians in training, in laboratory medicine and in other              developed tools to assess ‘‘customer’’ satisfaction in ana-
disciplines of medicine. For example, the Education Com-                 tomic pathology, specifically surveying physician-users
mittee of the College of American Pathologists defined pa-                about services available.6 Tools that efficiently assess phy-
thology-specific competencies and used data from a sur-                   sicians across a broad range of competencies are needed.
vey of pathologists to create educational courses targeted               The 360 evaluation is one of the tools that the Academy
to maintenance of each competence category.3 Similarly,                  of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists has rec-
the Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Sci-                   ommended to assess ACGME competencies.4 This evalu-
                                                                         ation is particularly helpful for assessing competencies re-
  Accepted for publication October 15, 2008.                             lated to patient care, interpersonal and communication
  From the Departments of Community Health Sciences (Drs Lockyer         skills, professionalism, and systems-based practice. In a
and Violato), Continuing Medical Education and Professional Devel-       360 global rating, questionnaires completed by multiple
opment (Dr Lockyer and Ms Fidler), and Pathology (Dr Alakija), Faculty   individuals in the training sphere of influence assess per-
of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.                     formance of the trainee. Supervisory faculty, medical tech-
  The authors have no relevant financial interest in the products or
                                                                         nologists, clinicians, residents with whom the resident has
companies described in this article.
  Reprints: Jocelyn M. Lockyer, PhD, University of Calgary, Continuing   consultative interactions, and patients in whose care the
Medical Education and Professional Development, 3330 Hospital Dr  
To top