Creation and Implementation of an Online Tool for Feedback on Resident Teaching: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: There are few assessments of the competence and growth of surgical residents as educators. We developed and piloted an observation-based feedback tool (FT) to provide residents direct feedback during a specific teaching session, as perceived by medical students (MS). We hypothesized that residents' performance would improve with frequent, low stakes, observation-based feedback. SETTING: This prospective study took place at an academic general surgery program. PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups of MS, surgical residents, and faculty informed FT development. MS completed the FT regarding resident teaching. DESIGN: The FT utilized 5 slider-bar ratings (0 to 100) about the teaching encounter and a checklist of 16 desirable teaching behaviors. QR codes and weekly email links were distributed for 12 months (6 clerkship blocks) to promote use. Residents were sent their results after each block. A survey after each block assessed motivation for use and gathered feedback on the FT. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis (medians, IQRs). Primary measures of performance were median of the slider-bar scores and the number of teaching behaviors. RESULTS: The FT was used 111 times; 37 of 46 residents were rated by up to 65 MS. The median rating on the slider-bars was 100 and the median number of desirable teaching behaviors was 12; there were no differences based on gender or PGY level. 10 residents had 5 or more FT observations during the year. Four residents had evaluations completed in 4 or more blocks and 19 residents had evaluations completed in at least 2 blocks. Over time, 13 residents had consistent slider-bar scores, 1 resident had higher scores, and 5 residents had lower scores (defined as a more than 5-point change from initial rating). Frequency of use of the FT decreased over time (38, 32, 9, 21, 7, 5 uses per block). The post-use survey was completed by 24 MS and 19 residents. Most common reasons for usage were interest in improving surgical learning environment, giving positive feedback (MS), and improving teaching skills (residents). Most common reasons for lack of usage from residents were "I did not think I taught enough to ask for feedback," "I forgot it existed," and "I did not know it existed." CONCLUSIONS: The FT did not lead to any meaningful improvement in resident scores over the course of the year. This may be due to overall high scores, suggesting that the components of the FT may require reevaluation. Additionally, decreased utilization of the instrument over time made it challenging to assess change in performance of specific residents, likely due to lack of awareness of the FT despite frequent reminders. Successful implementation of observation-based teaching assessments may require better integration with residency or clerkship objectives.

The use of core descriptors from the ENiGMA code study in recent literature: a systematic review.

AIM: The heterogeneity in data quality presented in studies regarding Crohn's anal fistula (CAF) limit extrapolation into clinical practice. The ENiGMA collaborators established a core descriptor set to standardize reporting of CAF. The aim of this work was to quantify the use of these descriptors in recent literature. METHOD: We completed a systematic review of PubMed and the Cochrane Library, extracting publications from the past 10 years specific to the clinical interventions and outcomes of CAF, and reported in line with PRISMA guidance. Each article was assessed for inclusion of ENiGMA descriptors. The median number of descriptors per publication was evaluated along with the overall frequency of each individual descriptor. Use of ENiGMA descriptors was compared between medical and procedural publications. RESULTS: Ninety publications were included. The median number of descriptors was 15 of 37; 16 descriptors were used in over half of the publications while 17 were used in fewer than a third. Descriptors were more frequently used in procedural (n = 16) than medical publications (n = 14) (p = 0.031). In procedural publications, eight descriptors were more frequently used including Faecal incontinence, Number of previous fistula interventions, Presence and severity of anorectal stenosis and Current proctitis. Medical publications were more likely to include Previous response to biological therapy and Duration and type of current course of biological therapy. CONCLUSION: With many descriptors being used infrequently and variations between medical and procedural literature, the colorectal community should assess the need for all 37 descriptors.