Increasing faculty participation in resident education and providing cost-effective self-assessment module credit to faculty through resident-generated didactics.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): Board certified radiation oncologists and medical physicists are required to earn self-assessment module (SAM) continuing medical education (CME) credit, which may require travel costs or usage fees. Data indicate that faculty participation in resident teaching activities is beneficial to resident education. Our hypothesis was that providing the opportunity to earn SAM credit in resident didactics would increase faculty participation in and improve resident education. METHODS AND MATERIALS: SAM applications, comprising CME certified category 1 resident didactic lectures and faculty-generated questions with respective answers, rationales, and references, were submitted to the American Board of Radiology for formal review. Surveys were distributed to assess main academic campus physician, affiliate campus physician, physicist, and radiation oncology resident impressions regarding the quality of the lectures. Survey responses were designed in Likert-scale format. Sign-test was performed with P < .05 considered statistically different from neutral. RESULTS: First submission SAM approval was obtained for 9 of 9 lectures to date. A total of 52 SAM credits have been awarded to 4 physicists and 7 attending physicians. Main academic campus physician and affiliate campus physician attendance increased from 20% and 0%, respectively, over the 12 months preceding CME/SAM lectures, to 55.6% and 20%, respectively. Survey results indicated that the change to SAM lectures increased the quality of resident lectures (P = .001), attending physician participation in resident education (P < .0001), physicist involvement in medical resident education (P = .0006), and faculty motivation to attend resident didactics (P = .004). Residents reported an increased amount of time required to prepare lectures (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: We are the first department, to our knowledge, to offer SAM credit to clinical faculty for participation in resident-generated didactics. Offering SAM credit at resident lectures is a cost-effective alternative to purchasing SAM resources, increases faculty attendance, and may improve the quality of radiation oncology resident education.

A single activity with a practice quality improvement project for faculty and a quality improvement project for residents.

PURPOSE: The Next Accreditation System (NAS) requires radiation oncology residents to do a formal quality improvement project during their residency. The American Board of Radiology (ABR) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program requires certified physicians to complete a Practice Quality Improvement (PQI) project approximately every 3 years. The purpose of our project was to develop a clinical transition of care policy via a process that resulted in quality improvement project credit for residents and PQI credit for participating faculty. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Approval for project implementation was obtained from the ABR MOC committee. The PQI project consisted of an initial survey to assess resident perception on resident transition of care in our department, formal sign-out training, and 2 postintervention surveys after 1 and 11 months. The primary endpoint was the percentage of questions with ≤1 unfavorable responses. Sign-test was used to determine response difference from neutral. RESULTS: One hundred percent of surveyed residents completed the preintervention (n = 6), postintervention 1 (n = 7), and postintervention 2 (n = 8) surveys. In the preintervention, postintervention 1, and postintervention 2 surveys, 71.4%, 57.1%, and 57.1% of questions were answered with ≤1 unfavorable response, respectively. The number of questions with ≥75% favorable response was 7 (50%), 7 (50%), and 11 (78.5%) in the preintervention, postintervention 1, and postintervention 2 surveys, respectively (P = .13). A written sign-out template and monthly protected sign-out meetings were instituted. One resident and 3 attending physicians received credit for Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education NAS quality improvement and ABR MOC PQI projects, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This project shows the feasibility of a combined attending and resident physician effort to improve patient care and fulfill his or her respective ABR MOC PQI and Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education NAS requirements. Attending and resident physicians can tailor collaborative projects to fulfill MOC and NAS requirements unique to their subspecialty. Written sign-out templates and protected sign-out time may improve transition of care.

Assessing the value of an optional radiation oncology clinical rotation during the core clerkships in medical school.

PURPOSE: Few medical students are given proper clinical training in oncology, much less radiation oncology. We attempted to assess the value of adding a radiation oncology clinical rotation to the medical school curriculum. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In July 2010, Jefferson Medical College began to offer a 3-week radiation oncology rotation as an elective course for third-year medical students during the core surgical clerkship. During 2010 to 2012, 52 medical students chose to enroll in this rotation. The rotation included outpatient clinics, inpatient consults, didactic sessions, and case-based presentations by the students. Tests of students' knowledge of radiation oncology were administered anonymously before and after the rotation to evaluate the educational effectiveness of the rotation. Students and radiation oncology faculty were given surveys to assess feedback about the rotation. RESULTS: The students' prerotation test scores had an average of 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61-66%). The postrotation test scores improved to an average of 82% (95% CI, 80-83%; 18% absolute improvement). In examination question analysis, scores improved in clinical oncology from 63% to 79%, in radiobiology from 70% to 77%, and in medical physics from 62% to 88%. Improvements in all sections but radiobiology were statistically significant. Students rated the usefulness of the rotation as 8.1 (scale 1-9; 95% CI, 7.3-9.0), their understanding of radiation oncology as a result of the rotation as 8.8 (95% CI, 8.5-9.1), and their recommendation of the rotation to a classmate as 8.2 (95% CI, 7.6-9.0). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating a radiation oncology clinical rotation into the medical school curriculum improves student knowledge of radiation oncology, including aspects of clinical oncology, radiobiology, and medical physics. The rotation is appreciated by both students and faculty.