Implementation of a Mini-CEX Requirement Across All Third-Year Clerkships.

PROBLEM: Direct observation of medical students performing clinical tasks, such as eliciting a patient history or examining a patient, and the provision of feedback, are foundational to student improvement but have been reported to occur infrequently. The mini clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) is a tool that can facilitate direct observation and feedback. This study assessed the impact of a mini-CEX requirement across all 3rd-year clerkships on student report of direct observation by faculty and objectively measured clinical skills. INTERVENTION: A mini-CEX requirement across all 3rd-year clerkships was implemented in the 2012-2013 academic year. The impact of the mini-CEX requirement on student report of direct observation was assessed by end-of-clerkship surveys and Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) items on direct observation. The impact on students' clinical skills was assessed by a summative Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). Pre/post comparisons were assessed with chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. CONTEXT: A mini-CEX requirement had been in place for the internal medicine clerkship, and student reports of direct observation were historically higher for the internal medicine clerkship than for other clerkships. Faculty, residents, and students at each of the clinical sites across all 6 clerkships were oriented to the use of the mini-CEX; the feasibility of its use during usual patient interaction settings and the importance of direct observation and feedback for student improvement were emphasized during these sessions. OUTCOME: Adherence to the mini-CEX requirement was high: 92% of required forms were completed, and 78% of completed forms indicated that specific feedback was given. The proportion of students reporting direct observation of physical examination significantly increased in all clerkships, with the largest relative increase occurring in surgery (from 49% to 87%), χ2(1, N = 225) = 37.70, p < .0001. Significant increases were seen in faculty observation of history taking in pediatrics, surgery, and psychiatry. Direct observation rates also increased on the AAMC GQ items for history taking and physical exam for all clerkships. Failures on the summative OSCE decreased from 12% preintervention to 2% postintervention (p = .0046). LESSONS LEARNED: Institution of a mini-CEX requirement was feasible across all 3rd-year clerkships and was associated with a significant increase in student report of direct observation by faculty and a decrease in summative OSCE failure rates.

Impact of an evidence-based medicine curriculum on resident use of electronic resources: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is widely taught in residency, but evidence for effectiveness of EBM teaching on changing residents' behavior is limited. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of an EBM curriculum on residents' use of evidence-based resources in a simulated clinical experience. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: Fifty medicine residents randomized to an EBM teaching or control group. MEASUREMENTS: A validated test of EBM knowledge (Fresno test) was administered before and after intervention. Post intervention, residents twice completed a Web-based, multiple-choice instrument (15 items) comprised of clinical vignettes, first without then with access to electronic resources. Use of electronic resources was tracked using ProxyPlus software. Within group pre-post differences and between group post-test differences were examined. RESULTS: There was more improvement in EBM knowledge (100-point scale) for the intervention group compared to the control group (mean score increase 22 vs. 12, p = 0.012). In the simulated clinical experience, the most commonly accessed resources were Ovid (71% of residents accessed) and InfoPOEMs (62%) for the EBM group and UptoDate (67%) and MDConsult (58%) for the control group. Residents in the EBM group were more likely to use evidence-based resources than the control group. Performance on clinical vignettes was similar between the groups both at baseline (p = 0.19) and with access to information resources (p = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: EBM teaching improved EBM knowledge and increased use of evidence-based resources by residents, but did not improve performance on Web-based clinical vignettes. Future studies will need to examine impact of EBM teaching on clinical outcomes.

Impact of Required Versus Self-Directed Use of Virtual Patient Cases on Clerkship Performance: A Mixed-Methods Study.

PURPOSE: To explore how students use and benefit from virtual patient cases (VPCs). METHOD: In academic years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, cohorts of students in pediatrics (Peds), family medicine (FM), and internal medicine (IM) clerkships were allocated to either core required use (CRU) or self-directed use (SU) of MedU VPCs. Outcomes included number and time of case review, student perception of learning from VPCs, National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examination scores, and summative clinical ratings for medical knowledge and differential diagnoses/problem solving. Focus groups were conducted each year. Mean differences were compared by t test. RESULTS: A total of 255 students participated in the study. Mean number of cases completed by the CRU group was significantly higher than that by the SU group (13.9 vs. 3.1 for FM, 16.1 vs. 3.9 for Peds, and 10.4 vs. 1.2 for IM) (P < .001). Student-perceived value ratings of VPCs were similar between groups. Students described VPCs as time consuming but useful for supplementing clinical conditions not seen in person. Mean scores on NBME subject examinations for CRU versus SU groups were not different between groups in any clerkship, nor were there significant differences in the summative clinical ratings for medical knowledge or differential diagnosis/clinical reasoning. CONCLUSIONS: Although VPCs continue to serve an important role in exposing students to clinical conditions not seen in person, the optimal employment of this technology in clerkship pedagogy requires further exploration.

What Are We Telling Our Students? A National Survey of Clerkship Directors' Advice for Students Applying to Internal Medicine Residency.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the advice fourth-year medical students receive from their advisors as they prepare to apply for residency training. OBJECTIVE: We collected information on recommendations given to medical students preparing to apply to internal medicine residencies regarding fourth-year schedules and application strategies. METHODS: Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine conducted its annual member survey in June 2013. We analyzed responses on student advising using descriptive and comparative statistics, and free-text responses using content analysis. RESULTS: Of 124 members, 94 (76%) responded, and 83 (88%) advised fourth-year medical students. Nearly half (45%) advised an average of more than 20 students a year. Advisors encouraged students to take a medicine subinternship (Likert scale mean 4.84 [1, strongly discourage, to 5, strongly encourage], SD = 0.61); a critical care rotation (4.38, SD = 0.79); and a medicine specialty clinical rotation (4.01, SD = 0.80). Advisors reported they thought fourth-year students should spend a mean of 6.5 months doing clinical rotations (range 1-10, SD = 1.91). They recommended highest academic quartile students apply to a median of 10 programs (range 1-30) and lowest quartile students apply to 15 programs (range 3-100). Top recommendations involved maximizing student competitiveness, valuing program fit over reputation, and recognizing key decision points in the application process. CONCLUSIONS: Undergraduate medical advisors recommended specific strategies to enhance students' competitiveness in the Match and to prepare them for residency. The results can inform program directors and encourage dialogue between undergraduate medical education and graduate medical education on how to best utilize the fourth year.