Self-Assessment of Addiction Medicine Core Competencies in Four Year Groups of Psychiatrists in Training: Efficacy of the Addiction Medicine Training Needs Assessment Scale in a Local Training Context.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY European Addiction Research Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-17 DOI:10.1159/000528409
W J Lucas Pinxten, Darius Jokūbonis, Virginija Adomaitiene, Darius Leskauskas, Giel J M Hutschemaekers, Cornelis A J De Jong
{"title":"Self-Assessment of Addiction Medicine Core Competencies in Four Year Groups of Psychiatrists in Training: Efficacy of the Addiction Medicine Training Needs Assessment Scale in a Local Training Context.","authors":"W J Lucas Pinxten, Darius Jokūbonis, Virginija Adomaitiene, Darius Leskauskas, Giel J M Hutschemaekers, Cornelis A J De Jong","doi":"10.1159/000528409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In addiction medicine training, self-assessment is increasingly used to support self-regulation learning by identifying standards of excellence, competence gaps, and training needs. To ensure psychiatrists in Lithuania also develop specific addiction competencies, the Lithuanian Health Sciences University faculty in Kaunas developed an addiction psychiatry curriculum.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this research is to explore the efficacy of the AM-TNA scale to measure individual and group differences in proficiency in the core competencies of addiction medicine. A cross-sectional study and a convenience sample were used.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We studied the differences in performance in addiction medicine competencies between 4 successive year groups and analysed the variance to determine the statistical differences between the means of 4 year groups with biases, resulting from repeated measurement statistically corrected-for.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the psychiatrists in training, 41% or 59% completed the scale. The assessment of competencies suggested that all but 2 competencies differ significantly (p < 0.05) between the 4 groups. The post hoc analyses indicated that mean scores for 24 of the 30 core competencies differed significantly between the year groups (p < 0.05) and showed a gradual increase in scores of self-assessed competencies over the 4 year groups. We found adequate scale variance and a gradual increase in self-assessed competencies between the 4 year groups, suggesting a positive association between the results of incremental professional training and improved self-assessed substance use disorders (SUD) competency scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study illustrates the efficacy of the AM-TNA scale as an assessment instrument in a local training context. Future research should aim to have larger sample sizes, be longitudinal in design, assess individual progress, and focus on comparing and combining self-reported competencies with validated objective external assessment and feedback.</p>","PeriodicalId":11902,"journal":{"name":"European Addiction Research","volume":"29 1","pages":"76-82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9932823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Addiction Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000528409","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In addiction medicine training, self-assessment is increasingly used to support self-regulation learning by identifying standards of excellence, competence gaps, and training needs. To ensure psychiatrists in Lithuania also develop specific addiction competencies, the Lithuanian Health Sciences University faculty in Kaunas developed an addiction psychiatry curriculum.

Objectives: The aim of this research is to explore the efficacy of the AM-TNA scale to measure individual and group differences in proficiency in the core competencies of addiction medicine. A cross-sectional study and a convenience sample were used.

Method: We studied the differences in performance in addiction medicine competencies between 4 successive year groups and analysed the variance to determine the statistical differences between the means of 4 year groups with biases, resulting from repeated measurement statistically corrected-for.

Results: Of the psychiatrists in training, 41% or 59% completed the scale. The assessment of competencies suggested that all but 2 competencies differ significantly (p < 0.05) between the 4 groups. The post hoc analyses indicated that mean scores for 24 of the 30 core competencies differed significantly between the year groups (p < 0.05) and showed a gradual increase in scores of self-assessed competencies over the 4 year groups. We found adequate scale variance and a gradual increase in self-assessed competencies between the 4 year groups, suggesting a positive association between the results of incremental professional training and improved self-assessed substance use disorders (SUD) competency scores.

Conclusions: This study illustrates the efficacy of the AM-TNA scale as an assessment instrument in a local training context. Future research should aim to have larger sample sizes, be longitudinal in design, assess individual progress, and focus on comparing and combining self-reported competencies with validated objective external assessment and feedback.

Abstract Image

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
四年制精神科医师培训小组对成瘾医学核心能力的自我评估:成瘾医学培训需求评估量表在当地培训环境中的有效性。
背景:在成瘾医学培训中,自我评估被越来越多地用于通过确定卓越标准、能力差距和培训需求来支持自我调节学习。为了确保立陶宛的精神科医生也能发展出特定的成瘾能力,位于考纳斯的立陶宛健康科学大学教研室开发了成瘾精神病学课程:本研究旨在探讨 AM-TNA 量表在测量成瘾医学核心能力方面的个体和群体差异的有效性。研究采用了横断面研究和便利样本:我们研究了连续 4 个年级组在成瘾医学能力方面的表现差异,并分析了方差,以确定 4 个年级组平均值之间的统计差异,同时对重复测量产生的偏差进行了统计校正:接受培训的精神科医生中有 41% 或 59% 完成了量表。能力评估结果表明,除 2 项能力外,其他所有能力在 4 个组别之间均存在显著差异(P < 0.05)。事后分析表明,在 30 项核心能力中,有 24 项能力的平均得分在年级组之间存在显著差异(P < 0.05),并显示在 4 个年级组中,自我评估能力的得分逐渐增加。我们发现,4 个年级组之间有足够的量表方差,自评能力也在逐步提高,这表明渐进式专业培训的结果与药物使用障碍(SUD)自评能力分数的提高之间存在正相关:本研究说明了 AM-TNA 量表作为评估工具在当地培训环境中的有效性。未来的研究应着眼于更大的样本量、纵向设计、评估个人进展,并侧重于将自我报告的能力与经过验证的客观外部评估和反馈进行比较和结合。
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
European Addiction Research
European Addiction Research SUBSTANCE ABUSE-PSYCHIATRY
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.10%
发文量
32
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''European Addiction Research'' is a unique international scientific journal for the rapid publication of innovative research covering all aspects of addiction and related disorders. Representing an interdisciplinary forum for the exchange of recent data and expert opinion, it reflects the importance of a comprehensive approach to resolve the problems of substance abuse and addiction in Europe. Coverage ranges from clinical and research advances in the fields of psychiatry, biology, pharmacology and epidemiology to social, and legal implications of policy decisions. The goal is to facilitate open discussion among those interested in the scientific and clinical aspects of prevention, diagnosis and therapy as well as dealing with legal issues. An excellent range of original papers makes ‘European Addiction Research’ the forum of choice for all.
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of Machine Learning Based Adjustments to an eHealth Intervention Targeting Mild Alcohol Use. Impact of working conditions and other determinants on the risk of substance misuse among healthcare residents: results of a cross-sectional study. ESCAPE study: Cannabidiol use in patients treated for substance use disorders, prevalence of use and characteristics of users. Exploring Recovery Priorities in Inpatient Addiction Treatment: A Q-Methodological Study. Global Assessment of Training Needs in Addiction Medicine.
×
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