Developing and Implementing a Multisource Feedback Tool to Assess Competencies of Emergency Medicine Residents in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Multisource feedback (MSF) has potential value in learner assessment, but has not been broadly implemented nor studied in emergency medicine (EM). This study aimed to adapt existing MSF instruments for emergency department implementation, measure feasibility, and collect initial validity evidence to support score interpretation for learner assessment. METHODS: Residents from eight U.S. EM residency programs completed a self-assessment and were assessed by eight physicians, eight nonphysician colleagues, and 25 patients using unique instruments. Instruments included a five-point rating scale to assess interpersonal and communication skills, professionalism, systems-based practice, practice-based learning and improvement, and patient care. MSF feasibility was measured by percentage of residents who collected the target number of instruments. To develop internal structure validity evidence, Cronbach's alpha was calculated as a measure of internal consistency. RESULTS: A total of 125 residents collected a mean of 7.0 physician assessments (n = 752), 6.7 nonphysician assessments (n = 775), and 17.8 patient assessments (n = 2,100) with respective response rates of 67.2, 75.2, and 77.5%. Cronbach's alpha values for physicians, nonphysicians, patients, and self were 0.97, 0.97, 0.96, and 0.96, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that MSF implementation is feasible, although challenging. The tool and its scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency. EM educators may find the adaptation process and tools applicable to their learners.

Push, pull, and plant: the personal side of physician immigration to alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The global migration of physicians has led many international physicians to enter practice in Alberta, Canada. The study was designed to explore the personal side of migration and transition experiences of these international medical graduates (IMGs). METHODS: A qualitative study using telephone interviews and a semi-structured interview guide was used to interview 19 IMGs who are currently practicing and have held Part V, restricted or temporary practice licenses for less than 7 years. RESULTS: Three major themes were identified. The first was the "push" from their own country of origin and their perception that moving to Alberta would be better for them. Professional opportunities in their home country had been affected by changing policies, lack of infrastructure, and personal/family safety issues culminating in highly stressful work environments. The second was "pull." An improvement in the quality of personal life was associated with geographical, educational, recreational, and spiritual aspects of daily living for participants and their families in their new environment. The third theme was "plant"ie, factors that encouraged them to stay in Alberta. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the continued relevance of push and pull theory in understanding IMG physician migration. Our findings in this study indicate that remaining in place, or "being planted" is conditional on political, social, and economic aspects.

Gastroenterology fellowship training: approaches to curriculum assessment and evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Medical education requires ongoing curriculum development and evaluation to incorporate new knowledge and competencies. The Kern model of curricular development is a generic model to guide curriculum design, whereas the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) has a specific model for curriculum development through its accreditation structure. OBJECTIVE: To apply the Kern model to an assessment of a residency program in gastroenterology. METHODS: A case study was used, which is a method of qualitative research designed to help researchers understand people and the societal contexts in which they live. RESULTS: The six steps involved in the Kern model of curricular development include problem identification; needs assessment; establishing objectives; establishing educational strategies; implementation; and evaluation. The steps of the RCPSC model of curriculum development include establishing an administrative structure for the program; objectives; structure and organization of the program; resources; clinical, academic and scholarly content of the program; and evaluation. Two differences between the models for curriculum development include the ability of the Kern model to conduct problem identification and learner needs assessment. Identifying problems that exist suggests a need for an educational program, such as the long wait times for gastroenterology referrals. Assessing learner needs allows for the development of a tailored curriculum for the trainee. CONCLUSIONS: The Kern model and RCPSC model for curriculum development are complementary. Consideration by the RCPSC should be provided to add the missing elements of curriculum design to the accreditation structure for completeness.