Infusing geriatrics in Indian Health Service general primary care clinics: Extending VA workforce development training.

As federal partners, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and the Indian Health Service (IHS) agreed to share resources, such as education. The VA Geriatric Scholars Program, a workforce development program, provides one of its training programs on team-based primary care of elders to clinicians working in IHS and Tribal Health Programs. The practical impact of that training is described. A mixed methods approach was applied to the course's evaluation survey at five clinics in the Northwestern Plains, Southwest, Pacific Coast, and Alaska. Quantitative approaches assessed participants' self-reported intention to improve recognition and assessment of common geriatric syndromes. A qualitative approach applied to open-ended text responses revealed intensions to improve team-based care. Among the 51 respondents in our sample, we found significant improvements in self-reported ability to recognize previously unfamiliar potential risks to elders' health and safety, t(49) = 8.0233, p < .001, as well as increased comfort with conducting geriatric assessments and increased confidence in interprofessional team-based communication. Improvements to team-based care included enhanced clinical skills, organizational factors and the need to train additional employees. This evaluation demonstrates the value of sharing resources among federal partners and its value for participants in IHS and Tribal Health Programs.

A comparison of two standard-setting approaches in high-stakes clinical performance assessment using generalizability theory.

PURPOSE: Scoring clinical assessments in a reliable and valid manner using criterion-referenced standards remains an important issue and directly affects decisions made regarding examinee proficiency. This generalizability study of students' clinical performance examination (CPX) scores examines the reliability of those scores and of their interpretation, particularly according to a newly introduced, "critical actions" criterion-referenced standard and scoring approach. METHOD: The authors applied a generalizability framework to the performance scores of 477 third-year students attending three different medical schools in 2008. The norm-referenced standard included all station checklist items. The criterion-referenced standard included only those items deemed critical to patient care by a faculty panel. The authors calculated and compared variance components and generalizability coefficients for each standard across six common stations. RESULTS: Norm-referenced scores had moderate generalizability (ρ = 0.51), whereas criterion-referenced scores showed low dependability (φ = 0.20). The estimated 63% of measurement error associated with the person-by-station interaction suggests case specificity. Increasing the number of stations on the CPX from 6 to 24, an impractical solution both for cost and time, would still yield only moderate dependability (φ = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Though the performance assessment of complex skills, like clinical competence, seems intrinsically valid, careful consideration of the scoring standard and approach is needed to avoid misinterpretation of proficiency. Further study is needed to determine how best to improve the reliability of criterion-referenced scores, by implementing changes to the examination structure, the process of standard-setting, or both.