Internal Medicine Residents' Perspectives on Receiving Feedback in Milestone Format.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to historical feedback, which was vague or provided residents' numerical scores without clear meaning, milestone-based feedback is focused on specific knowledge, skills, and behaviors that define developmental trajectory. It was anticipated that residents would welcome the more specific and actionable feedback provided by the milestone framework, but this has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: We assessed internal medicine (IM) residents' perceptions of receiving feedback in the milestone framework, particularly assessing perception of the utility of milestone-based feedback compared to non-milestone-based feedback. METHODS: We surveyed a total of 510 IM residents from 7 institutions. Survey questions assessed resident perception of milestone feedback in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and trajectory of professional development. Postgraduate years 2 and 3 (PGY-2 and PGY-3) residents were asked to compare milestones with prior methods of feedback. RESULTS: Of 510 residents, 356 (69.8%) responded. Slightly less than half of the residents found milestone-based feedback "extremely useful" or "very useful" in identifying strengths (44%), weaknesses (43%), specific areas for improvement (45%), and appropriate education progress (48%). Few residents found such feedback "not very useful" or "not at all useful" in these domains. A total of 51% of PGY-2 and PGY-3 residents agreed that receiving milestone-based feedback was more helpful than previous forms of feedback. CONCLUSIONS: IM residents are aware of the concepts of milestones, and half of the residents surveyed found milestone feedback more helpful than previous forms of feedback. More work needs to be done to understand how milestone-based feedback could be delivered more effectively to enhance resident development.

Transforming primary care training--patient-centered medical home entrustable professional activities for internal medicine residents.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. faces a critical gap between residency training and clinical practice that affects the recruitment and preparation of internal medicine residents for primary care careers. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) represents a new clinical microsystem that is being widely promoted and implemented to improve access, quality, and sustainability in primary care practice. AIM: We address two key questions regarding the training of internal medicine residents for practice in PCMHs. First, what are the educational implications of practice transformations to primary care home models? Second, what must we do differently to prepare internal medicine residents for their futures in PCMHs? PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The 2011 Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) PCMH Education Summit established seven work groups to address the following topics: resident workplace competencies, teamwork, continuity of care, assessment, faculty development, 'medical home builder' tools, and policy. The output from the competency work group was foundational for the work of other groups. The work group considered several educational frameworks, including developmental milestones, competencies, and entrustable professional activities (EPAs). RESULTS: The competency work group defined 25 internal medicine resident PCMH EPAs. The 2011 National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH standards served as an organizing framework for EPAs. DISCUSSION: The list of PCMH EPAs has the potential to begin to transform the education of internal medicine residents for practice and leadership in the PCMH. It will guide curriculum development, learner assessment, and clinical practice redesign for academic health centers.

From theory to actual practice: creation and application of milestones in an internal medicine residency program, 2004-2010.

BACKGROUND: In the USA, the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, Educational Innovations Project is a partner in reshaping residency training to meet increasingly complex systems of health care delivery. AIM: We describe the creation and implementation of milestones as a vehicle for translating educational theory into practice in preparing residents to provide safe, autonomous patient care. METHOD: Six program faculty leaders, all with advanced medical education training, met in an iterative process of developing, implementing, and modifying milestones until a final set were vetted. RESULTS: We first formed the profile of a Master Internist. We then translated it into milestone language and implemented its integration across the program. Thirty-seven milestones were applied in all settings and rotations to reach explicit educational outcomes. We created three types of milestones: Progressive, build one on top of the other to mastery; additive, adding multiple behaviors together to culminate in mastery; and descriptive, using a proscribe set of complex, predetermined steps toward mastery. CONCLUSIONS: Using milestones, our program has enhanced an educational model into explicit, end of training goals. Milestone implementation has yielded positive results toward competency-based training and others may adapt our strategies in a similar effort.

Disruptions and satisfaction in internal medicine resident continuity clinic differ between inpatient and outpatient rotations.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about whether assignment to simultaneous inpatient and outpatient clinical duties causes disruptions during internal medicine resident continuity clinic and impacts trainee satisfaction. PURPOSE: Our purpose was to determine whether dual inpatient and continuity clinic responsibilities impact resident stress and document the number, type, and immediacy of interruptions in continuity clinics. METHODS: Methods included a prospective 2-residency survey of 70 internal medicine residents performing 240 half-day continuity clinic sessions. RESULTS: More than half (52%) of trainees on inpatient rotations felt pressured to return to their ward duties. Half (50%) of residents thought clinic increased work hours, and the majority (70%) did not think continuity clinic detracted from their education on inpatient or elective rotations. Disturbances were more likely to occur on inpatient rotations (odds ratio 4.52, 95% confidence interval = 2.298.92) than on outpatient rotations. The time required to address an interruption was 3.9 +/- 4.51 min. Residents thought many (46%) problems addressed during clinic could have waited until clinic completion. CONCLUSIONS: Residents on inpatient rotations who were commonly interrupted in clinic felt pressured to return to ward duties and unable to focus on their clinic patients. Internal medicine faculty should modify curriculum to minimize the interference of other duties in resident clinics.