Impact of Faculty Training in Health Systems Science on Scholarly Presentation of Resident Physician and Fellow Quality Improvement Projects.

The objective was to evaluate whether faculty participation in a Health Systems Science training program was associated with increased presentation and publication of quality improvement (QI) projects involving resident physicians and fellows at 1 institution. The authors evaluated annual, department-level counts of QI projects with resident physician or fellow involvement, presented locally or published, according to residency or fellowship program director and faculty participation in Teachers of Quality Academy. Ten clinical departments had 82 presentations and 2 publications. Each additional faculty member's participation in Teachers of Quality Academy increased the annual count of published or presented QI projects by 9% (P < 0.001). At this institution, participation in a Health Systems Science training program among clinical faculty improved engagement of resident physicians and fellows in local presentation of QI projects.

Supporting Community-Based Family Medicine Residency Training Programs in North Carolina and their Potential Impact on Healthy NC 2030.

North Carolina is a leader in family medicine, but a growing health care chasm exists between the state's urban centers and rural areas. Training family medicine residents in rural communities can address disparities in health care access and improve rural population health metrics for all subsets of the population, goals that align well with renewed state and national strategies.

Making the Learning Continuum a Reality: The Critical Role of a Graduate Medical Education-Continuing Medical Education Partnership.

A true continuum of learning in physician education, envisioned as the seamless integration of undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education that results in lifelong learning, has yet to be realized. Rapid clinical change, evolving systems of health care, and a shift to competency-based training make the continuum and lifelong learning even more critical. Because they function independently, the efforts of Graduate Medical Education (GME) and Continuing Medical Education (CME) have fallen short of the integrated ideal. The complementary threads of accreditation requirements, expertise, resources, and scholarly activities provide an opportunity for GME and CME to operate in a more integrated and coordinated fashion. Our local GME-CME partnership model demonstrates that these complimentary threads can be tied together to effectively facilitate lifelong learning and promote an integrated learning continuum.

Milestones: The Road to Faculty Development.

PURPOSE: Milestones for the assessment of residents in graduate medical education mark a change in our evaluation paradigms. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has created milestones and defined them as significant points in development of a resident based on the 6 competencies. We propose that a similar approach be taken for resident assessment of teaching faculty. We believe this will establish parity and objectivity for faculty evaluation, provide improved data about attending surgeons' teaching, and standardize faculty evaluations by residents. METHODS: A small group of advanced surgery educators determined appropriate educational characteristics, resulting in creation of 11 milestones (Fig. 2) that were reviewed by faculty and residents. The residents have historically answered 16 questions, developed by our surgical education committee (Fig. 3), on a 5-point Likert score (never to very often). Three weeks after completing this Likert-type evaluation, the residents were asked to again evaluate attending faculty using the Faculty Milestones evaluation. The residents then completed a survey of 7 questions (scale of 1-9-disagree to strongly agree, neutral = 5), assessing the new milestones and compared with the previous Likert evaluation system. RESULTS: Of 32 surgery residents, 13 completed the Likert evaluations (3760 data points) and 13 completed the milestones evaluations (1800 data points). The number completing both or neither is not known, as the responses are anonymous when used for faculty feedback. The Faculty Milestones attending physicians' scores have far fewer top of range scores (21% vs 42%) and have a wider spread of data giving better indication of areas for improvement in teaching skills. The residents completed 17 surveys (116 responses) to evaluate the new milestones system. Surveys indicated that milestones were easier to use (average rating 6.13 ± 0.42 Standard Error (SE)), effective (6.82 ± 0.39) and efficient (6.11 ± 0.53), and more objective (6.69 ± 0.39/6.75 ± 0.38) than the Likert evaluations are. Average response was 6.47 ± 0.46 for overall satisfaction with the Faculty Milestones evaluation. More surveys were completed than evaluations, as all residents had an opportunity to review both evaluation systems. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty Milestones are more objective in evaluating surgical faculty and mirror the new paradigm in resident evaluations. Residents found this was an easier, more effective, efficient, and objective evaluation of our faculty. Although our Faculty Milestones are designed for surgical educators, they are likely to be applicable with appropriate modifications to other medical educators as well.