Faculty perspectives on the use of standardized versus non-standardized oral examinations to assess medical students.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if faculty perceive standardized oral examinations to be more objective and useful than the non-standardized format in assessing third-year medical students' learning on the obstetrics and gynecology rotation. METHODS: Obstetrics and gynecology faculty at three teaching hospitals were sampled to complete a survey retrospectively comparing the standardized oral examination (SOE) and non-standardized or traditional oral examinations (TOE).  A Likert scale (0-5) was used to assess satisfaction, objectivity, and usefulness of SOE and TOE.  Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare median Likert scale scores for each survey item. A Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to investigate the relationship between the perceived level of objectivity and SOE characteristics. For qualitative measures, content analysis was applied. RESULTS: Sixty-six percent (n=25) of eligible faculty completed the survey. Faculty perceived the standardized oral examination as significantly more objective compared with the non-standardized (z=-3.15, p=0.002). Faculty also found SOE to be more useful in assessing overall clerkship performance (z=-2.0, p<0.05). All of the survey participants were willing to administer the standardized examination again.  Faculty reported strengths of the SOE to be uniformity, fairness, and ease of use. Major weaknesses reported included inflexibility and decreased ability to assess students' higher order reasoning skills. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty found standardized oral examinations to be more objective in assessing third-year medical students' clinical competency when compared with a non-standardized approach.  This finding can be meaningfully applied to medical education programs internationally.

New Challenges for a Core Procedure: Development of a Faculty Workshop for Skills Maintenance for Abdominal Hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of a low-cost educational module for OB/GYN faculty skills maintenance for total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), a low frequency core procedure in obstetrics and gynecology. DESIGN: After review of existing educational tools and utilization of a modified Delphi method to establish consensus regarding key procedural components for skills maintenance, a 2-hour workshop was developed to review knowledge and participate in a simulation focused on the critical steps in performing TAH. An expert in TAH delivered a lecture highlighting important surgical considerations. Participants then rotated through simulation stations for critical steps in TAH: dissecting the bladder, identifying the ureter, and closing the cuff. Knowledge gains were assessed with a written pre- and posttest. Consecutive focus groups were conducted with participants on effectiveness of the workshop, and suggestions for improvement. Ideas identified in the first focus group were incorporated into the second workshop. SETTING: Massachusetts General Hospital, an academic tertiary care facility with a single Obstetrics and Gynecology faculty group, located in Boston, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants were recruited via email from full time specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology at Massachusetts General Hospital. Of the 25 eligible gynecology faculty subjects, 22 participated (88%). RESULTS: On pre or post-test comparison, 70% of participants scored higher on the posttest, demonstrating an increase in knowledge of critical TAH surgical steps. Focus group analyses identified the need for increased review and training demonstrations of TAH, and recommended continued offering of the workshop. CONCLUSIONS: Based on focus group responses and pre or posttest comparisons, the workshop was deemed feasible and enhanced short-term learning. Future directions include utilizing more challenging anatomic models and simulation scenarios and optimizing integration of expert demonstration and individualized coaching, as well as identifying regionally tailored surgical workshop programming.

Predictors of 30-day readmission following hysterectomy for benign and malignant indications at a tertiary care academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are costly, frequent, and increasingly under public scrutiny. With increased financial constraints on the medical environment, understanding the drivers of unscheduled readmissions following gynecologic surgery will become increasingly important to value-driven care. OBJECTIVE: The current study was conducted to identify risk factors for 30-day readmission following hysterectomy for benign and malignant indications. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2008 through 2010 of all nongravid hysterectomies at a single tertiary care academic medical center. Clinical, perioperative, and physician characteristics were collected. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of 30-day readmission, stratified by malignant and benign indications for hysterectomy. RESULTS: Among 1649 women who underwent a hysterectomy (1009 for benign indications and 640 for malignancy), 6% were subsequently readmitted within 30 days (8.9% for malignancy vs 4.2% for benign; P < .0001). The mean time to readmission was 13 days (15 days for malignancy vs 10 days for benign; P = .004). The most common reasons for readmission were gastrointestinal (38%) and infectious (34%) etiologies, and 11.6% of readmitted patients experienced a perioperative complication. Among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications, a history of a laparotomy, including cesarean delivery (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-4.25; P = .03), as well as a perioperative complication (AOR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.00-6.04; P = .05) were both associated with a >2-fold increased odds of readmission. Among women undergoing hysterectomy for malignancy, an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification of III or IV (AOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.05-3.50; P = .03), a longer length of initial hospitalization (3 days AOR, 7.83; 95% CI, 1.33-45.99; P = .02), and an estimated blood loss >500 mL (AOR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.28-8.45; P = .01) were associated with a higher odds of readmission; however, women who underwent a laparoscopic hysterectomy (AOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.86; P = .02) and who were discharged on postoperative day 1 (AOR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.82; P = .02) were at a decreased risk of readmission. Physician and operative characteristics were not significant predictors of readmission. CONCLUSION: This study found that malignancy, perioperative complications, and prior open abdominal surgery, including cesarean delivery, are significant risk factors for consequent 30-day readmission following index hysterectomy. It may be possible to identify patients at highest risk for readmission at the time of hysterectomy, which can assist in developing interventions to reduce such events.