Summative Entrustment Decision-Making in a National Entrustable Professional Activity-Based Residency Training Programme: Where theory meets practice

Maaike Smit, Reinoud J.B.J. Gemke, Karsten Loon, Marieke Visser, M. Hoog, Janiëlle Velden
{"title":"Summative Entrustment Decision-Making in a National Entrustable Professional Activity-Based Residency Training Programme: Where theory meets practice","authors":"Maaike Smit, Reinoud J.B.J. Gemke, Karsten Loon, Marieke Visser, M. Hoog, Janiëlle Velden","doi":"10.18103/mra.v11i6.3863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) framework was introduced to operationalise and translate competency-based medical education into daily practice. Adoption of EPAs is recommended and supported in guidelines by educational research on trust and entrustment decision-making. However, systematic field studies evaluating the experiences of medical professionals (residents and supervisors) working with an EPA framework in daily practice are lacking. Still these evaluations are necessary to support the design and implementation of new EPA-based residency training programmes. This study provides an in-depth insight and a more comprehensive understanding of the experiences of professionals working in an EPA-based residency training programme. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using a constructivist approach. Focus groups were used for separate interviews with residents and supervisors assessing their experiences with the first national EPA-based residency training programme in the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the results of the focus groups and to define relevant themes. Results: The EPA framework enabled residents to enhance and individualise their training programme. Personal leadership proved to be essential for finding a balance between the requirements of the national training programme and exploration of residents’ individual talents, experience and learning curve. Supervisors’ supportive and guiding role is crucial throughout the process of EPA acquirement. Independent from each other, supervisors and residents indicated that trust (and not exhaustive testing) is essential in the summative assessment by a Clinical Competence Committee (CCC). Supervisors see added value in the mandatory portfolio that residents compile to help them prepare for the CCC meeting. Starting to work without supervision is an important but challenging goal once an EPA has been acquired. The ability to further individualise the training programme after an EPA has been acquired, varies among residents. Discussion: We found that residents and supervisors see added value in working and learning in an EPA-based residency training programme. Awareness and encouragement of self-regulated learning skills could potentially help create a balance between programme requirements and individualisation. When discussing a portfolio, trust and gut-feelings during CCC meetings is fundamental and helpful for supervisors to get a comprehensive view of the resident’s performance. An autonomy-supportive supervision strategy could encourage and improve residents’ autonomy and practice of working without direct supervision after acquiring an EPA.","PeriodicalId":94137,"journal":{"name":"Medical research archives","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical research archives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v11i6.3863","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) framework was introduced to operationalise and translate competency-based medical education into daily practice. Adoption of EPAs is recommended and supported in guidelines by educational research on trust and entrustment decision-making. However, systematic field studies evaluating the experiences of medical professionals (residents and supervisors) working with an EPA framework in daily practice are lacking. Still these evaluations are necessary to support the design and implementation of new EPA-based residency training programmes. This study provides an in-depth insight and a more comprehensive understanding of the experiences of professionals working in an EPA-based residency training programme. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using a constructivist approach. Focus groups were used for separate interviews with residents and supervisors assessing their experiences with the first national EPA-based residency training programme in the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the results of the focus groups and to define relevant themes. Results: The EPA framework enabled residents to enhance and individualise their training programme. Personal leadership proved to be essential for finding a balance between the requirements of the national training programme and exploration of residents’ individual talents, experience and learning curve. Supervisors’ supportive and guiding role is crucial throughout the process of EPA acquirement. Independent from each other, supervisors and residents indicated that trust (and not exhaustive testing) is essential in the summative assessment by a Clinical Competence Committee (CCC). Supervisors see added value in the mandatory portfolio that residents compile to help them prepare for the CCC meeting. Starting to work without supervision is an important but challenging goal once an EPA has been acquired. The ability to further individualise the training programme after an EPA has been acquired, varies among residents. Discussion: We found that residents and supervisors see added value in working and learning in an EPA-based residency training programme. Awareness and encouragement of self-regulated learning skills could potentially help create a balance between programme requirements and individualisation. When discussing a portfolio, trust and gut-feelings during CCC meetings is fundamental and helpful for supervisors to get a comprehensive view of the resident’s performance. An autonomy-supportive supervision strategy could encourage and improve residents’ autonomy and practice of working without direct supervision after acquiring an EPA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于国家可委托专业活动的住院医师培训计划中的总结性委托决策:理论与实践的结合
简介:可信赖的专业活动(EPA)框架被引入到操作和转化能力为基础的医学教育到日常实践。关于信任和委托决策的教育研究在指导方针中建议和支持采用环境保护措施。然而,缺乏系统的实地研究,评估在日常实践中使用EPA框架的医疗专业人员(住院医生和主管)的经验。然而,这些评价对于支持设计和执行新的以环境保护方案为基础的住院医师培训方案是必要的。本研究提供了一个深入的见解和更全面的了解专业人士的经验,在epa为基础的住院医师培训计划工作。方法:采用建构主义方法进行定性研究。焦点小组对住院医师和主管进行单独访谈,评估他们在荷兰第一个基于环境保护的全国住院医师培训方案中的经验。专题分析用于分析焦点小组的结果并确定相关主题。结果:EPA框架使居民能够加强和个性化他们的培训计划。在国家培训方案的要求与探索居民的个人才能、经验和学习曲线之间找到平衡,个人领导证明是必不可少的。主管的支持和指导作用在整个EPA获取过程中至关重要。督导医师和住院医师相互独立地表示,信任(而不是详尽的测试)在临床能力委员会(CCC)的总结性评估中是必不可少的。监事们看到了居民们汇编的强制性档案的附加价值,这些档案可以帮助他们为CCC会议做准备。一旦获得EPA,在没有监督的情况下开始工作是一个重要但具有挑战性的目标。获得EPA后,进一步个性化培训计划的能力因居民而异。讨论:我们发现住院医师和主管都看到了在epa住院医师培训项目中工作和学习的附加价值。认识和鼓励自我调节的学习技能可能有助于在课程要求和个性化之间取得平衡。在讨论投资组合时,信任和内心感受在CCC会议上是基本的,有助于主管全面了解住院医师的表现。自主支持的监督策略可以鼓励和提高居民在获得EPA后的自主权和不受直接监督的工作实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Achieving Chronic Care Equity by Leveraging the Telehealth Ecosystem (ACCTIVATE): A Multilevel Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol. Cultural Effects on the Performance of Older Haitian Immigrants on Timed Cognitive Tests. Characteristics associated with social anxiety in adults with developmental stuttering: A review. Air Pollution as an Environmental Risk Factor for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias. Hybrid care model: Combining telemedicine and office visits for diabetes management in older adults with type 1 diabetes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1