Assessing Nephrology Fellows' Skills in Communicating About Kidney Replacement Therapy and Kidney Biopsy: A Multicenter Clinical Simulation Study on Breaking Bad News.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Interpersonal communication skills and professionalism competencies are difficult to assess among nephrology trainees. We developed a formative "Breaking Bad News" simulation and implemented a study in which nephrology fellows were assessed with regard to their skills in providing counseling to simulated patients confronting the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) or kidney biopsy. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of communication competency in the setting of preparing for KRT for kidney failure, for KRT for acute kidney injury (AKI), or for kidney biopsy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 58 first- and second-year nephrology fellows assessed during 71 clinical evaluation sessions at 8 training programs who participated in an objective structured clinical examination of simulated patients in 2017 and 2018. PREDICTORS: Fellowship training year and clinical scenario. OUTCOME: Primary outcome was the composite score for the "overall rating" item on the Essential Elements of Communication-Global Rating Scale 2005 (EEC-GRS), as assessed by simulated patients. Secondary outcomes were the score for EEC-GRS "overall rating" item for each scenario, score < 3 for any EEC-GRS item, Mini-Clinical Examination Exercise (Mini-CEX) score < 3 on at least 1 item (as assessed by faculty), and faculty and fellow satisfaction with simulation exercise (via a survey they completed). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Nonparametric tests of hypothesis comparing performance by fellowship year (primary goal) and scenario. RESULTS: Composite scores for EEC-GRS overall rating item were not significantly different between fellowship years (P = 0.2). Only 4 of 71 fellow evaluations had an unsatisfactory score for the EEC-GRS overall rating item on any scenario. On Mini-CEX, 17% scored < 3 on at least 1 item in the kidney failure scenario; 37% and 53% scored < 3 on at least 1 item in the AKI and kidney biopsy scenarios, respectively. In the survey, 96% of fellows and 100% of faculty reported the learning objectives were met and rated the experience good or better in 3 survey rating questions. LIMITATIONS: Relatively brief time for interactions; limited familiarity with and training of simulated patients in use of EEC-GRS. CONCLUSIONS: The fellows scored highly on the EEC-GRS regardless of their training year, suggesting interpersonal communication competency is achieved early in training. The fellows did better with the kidney failure scenario than with the AKI and kidney biopsy scenarios. Structured simulated clinical examinations may be useful to inform curricular choices and may be a valuable assessment tool for communication and professionalism.

The peritoneal dialysis orders objective structured clinical examination (OSCE): A formative assessment for nephrology fellows.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) management is a fundamental nephrology skill, especially with the recent emphasis on home dialysis. We report a prospective multicentre cohort study of a formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessing competence in managing PD-associated bacterial peritonitis, using the unified model of construct validity. METHODS: The OSCE was developed by the principal investigators and reviewed by two subject matter experts. The test committee (eight nephrologists and one PD nurse) assessed test item difficulty/relevance and determined passing score. There were 22 test items (7 evidence-based/standard-of-care questions). Passing score was 16/22 (73%). No item had median relevance less than 'important', and all were easy to medium difficulty. Content validity index was 0.91. Preliminary validation (16 board-certified volunteers): mean score was 19 ± 2, with 94% (15/16) passing. Kappa = 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.94]. Cronbach's α = 0.70. RESULTS: Eighty-seven fellows (16 programmes) were tested; 67% passed. Fellows scored significantly less than validators: 17 ± 3 versus 19 ± 2, p < 0.001 [95% CI 1.2-3.6]. Eighty-six per cent of evidence-based/standard-of-care questions were answered correctly by validators versus 54% by fellows; p < 0.001. Ninety-three per cent of fellows recognized that sufficient criteria were present to diagnose peritonitis, but only 17% correctly indicated all three. Seventy-seven per cent recognized peritonitis-associated ultrafiltration failure, but only 17% prescribed 21 days of antibiotic treatment for gram-negative peritonitis. Eighty-five per cent of fellows surveyed agreed/strongly agreed that the OSCE was useful in self-assessing proficiency. Second-year in-training examination and OSCE scores were positively correlated (Pearson's r = 0.57, p < 0.00). CONCLUSIONS: The OSCE may be used to formatively assess fellow proficiency in managing PD-associated peritonitis.