Stages of Milestones Implementation: A Template Analysis of 16 Programs Across 4 Specialties.

BACKGROUND: Since 2013, US residency programs have used the competency-based framework of the Milestones to report resident progress and to provide feedback to residents. The implementation of Milestones-based assessments, clinical competency committee (CCC) meetings, and processes for providing feedback varies among programs and warrants systematic examination across specialties. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine how varying assessment, CCC, and feedback implementation strategies result in different outcomes in resource expenditure and stakeholder engagement, and to explore the contextual forces that moderate these outcomes. METHODS: From 2017 to 2018, interviews were conducted of program directors, CCC chairs, and residents in emergency medicine (EM), internal medicine (IM), pediatrics, and family medicine (FM), querying their experiences with Milestone processes in their respective programs. Interview transcripts were coded using template analysis, with the initial template derived from previous research. The research team conducted iterative consensus meetings to ensure that the evolving template accurately represented phenomena described by interviewees. RESULTS: Forty-four individuals were interviewed across 16 programs (5 EM, 4 IM, 5 pediatrics, 3 FM). We identified 3 stages of Milestone-process implementation, including a resource-intensive early stage, an increasingly efficient transition stage, and a final stage for fine-tuning. CONCLUSIONS: Residency program leaders can use these findings to place their programs along an implementation continuum and gain an understanding of the strategies that have enabled their peers to progress to improved efficiency and increased resident and faculty engagement.

The Role of Gender in the Experience and Impact of Recertification Exam Preparation: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Physicians.

Background: Little is known about how physicians experience preparing for board recertification examinations. As women make up a growing proportion of the primary care physician workforce, we aimed to explore how primary care physicians experience the personal and professional impacts of recertification examination preparation activities, and whether these impacts differ by gender. Materials and Methods: We conducted exploratory qualitative semistructured interviews with 80 primary care physicians, who had recently taken either the American Board of Family Medicine or American Board of Internal Medicine recertification examination and who practice outpatient care. We used an iterative recruitment approach to obtain a representative sample. We applied a team-based constant comparative analytic approach to identify and categorize themes related to how preparing for the recertification examination impacted their personal or professional lives, and then compared these themes by physician gender. Results: We interviewed 41 male and 39 female participants. Physicians most frequently described taking time from personal rather than professional activities to study, but often said this was "no big deal." Physicians described impacts on personal life such as missing out on family or leisure time, conflicts with parenting responsibilities, and an increased reliance on their spouse for domestic and childcare duties. Female physicians more frequently described parenting and leisure time impacts than males did. Conclusions: Recertification examination preparation impacts physicians' personal lives in a variety of ways and are sometimes experienced differently along gendered lines. These findings suggest opportunities for employers, payers, and specialty boards to help physicians ease potential burdens related to maintaining board certification.

How Physicians Prepare for Maintenance of Certification Exams: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: Little is known about how board-certified physicians prepare for their periodic maintenance of certification (MOC) examinations. This qualitative study explores how physicians experience MOC exam preparation: how they prepare for the exams and decide what to study and how exam preparation compares with what they normally do to keep their medical knowledge current. METHOD: Between September 2016 and March 2017, the authors interviewed 80 primary care physicians who had recently taken either the American Board of Family Medicine or American Board of Internal Medicine MOC exam. They analyzed transcripts and notes from these interviews looking for patterns and emergent themes, using the constant comparative method and a social practice theory perspective. RESULTS: Most interviewees studied for their MOC exams by varying from their routines for staying current with medical knowledge, both by engaging with a different scope of information and by adopting different study methods. Physicians described exam preparation as returning to a student/testing mindset, which some welcomed and others experienced negatively or with ambivalence. CONCLUSIONS: What physicians choose to study bounds what they can learn from the MOC exam process and, therefore, also bounds potential improvements to their patient care. Knowing how physicians actually prepare, and how these activities compare with what they do when not preparing for an exam, can inform debates over the value of requiring such exams, as well as conversations about how certification boards and other key stakeholders in physicians' continuing professional development could improve the MOC process.

Tiny Moments Matter: Promoting Professionalism in Everyday Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Professionalism rests upon a number of individual, environmental, and societal level factors, leading to specific professional behavior in specific situations. Focusing on professional lapses to identify and remediate unprofessional physicians is incomplete. We explored professionalism in practicing internal medicine physicians in the context of everyday practice, to highlight how typical experiences contribute to positive, yet often unnoticed, professional behavior. METHODS: In-depth interviews were used to uncover 13 physicians' most meaningful experiences of professionalism. Data were collected and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Results revealed several themes around which physicians embody professionalism in their daily lives. Physicians feel most professional when they are able to connect and establish trust with patients and colleagues and when they serve as positive role models to others. Physicians conceptualize professionalism as a dynamic and evolving competency, one that requires a lifelong commitment and that provides opportunities for lifelong learning. DISCUSSION: Focusing on actual perceptions of experiences in practice offers important insights into how physicians think about professionalism beyond a traditional remediation and lapses perspective. Physicians often go out of their way to connect with patients and colleagues, serving and modeling for others, often at the expense of their own work-life balance. These moments help to infuse energy and positivity into physician practices during a time when physicians may feel overburdened, overscheduled, and overregulated. Understanding professionalism as developmental helps frame professionalism as a lifelong competency subject to growth and modification over time.

Professionalism and maintenance of certification: using vignettes describing interpersonal dilemmas to stimulate reflection and learning.

INTRODUCTION: Physicians do not always agree on "rules" governing behavior in professionally challenging situations. Little is known about contextual factors that influence physician approaches in these situations. We explored the individual-, social-, and societal-level factors that physicians consider when responding to 2 common professional dilemmas. We were particularly interested in knowing the extent to which physicians engage in self-reflection as a result of responding to the vignettes. METHODS: A cross-sectional Web-based survey was sent to a random sample of 396 physicians, prompting them to respond to scripted professional dilemmas. RESULTS: A total of 120 physicians responded, yielding a response rate of 32.6%. Physicians responded to these dilemmas in highly variable ways, negotiating a complex array of contextual factors in their decisions. Interacting factors involving individual-level physician (eg, worry, guilt), patient (eg, nature of medical condition or relationship with patient), and social/societal (eg, policy, what peers or colleagues do) were important drivers in physician responses. Qualitative analysis revealed that several interacting themes guide physician approaches to professional dilemmas: patient welfare; types of patients; political, ethical, or legal issues; guiding principles; values; rules; and habits. DISCUSSION: Physicians negotiate a complex set of individual-, social-, and societal-level factors in response to professional dilemmas. This finding has important implications for the promotion and assessment of professional behavior in practicing physicians. Reflecting on scenarios may be an opportunity for physicians to learn about how and why they make decisions in difficult situations.

Faculty staff perceptions of feedback to residents after direct observation of clinical skills.

CONTEXT: Performance-based workplace assessments are increasingly important in clinical training. Given the inaccuracy of self-assessment, the provision of external feedback to residents about their clinical skills is necessary for the development of expertise. However, little is known about the processes used by faculty members in giving feedback to residents after observing them with patients. This study explores the factors that underpin faculty members' decisions regarding the feedback they give to residents after directly observing them with patients and the factors that influence how feedback is delivered. METHODS: In 2009, 44 general internal medicine faculty staff responsible for out-patient resident teaching from 16 internal medicine residency programmes watched four videotaped scenarios and two live scenarios of standardised residents (SRs) with standardised patients and rated the SRs using the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) format. Faculty staff also provided feedback to the SRs after the live encounters. After each encounter, faculty staff were individually interviewed using a semi-structured interview. Interviews were videotaped, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory methods. RESULTS: Two broad themes were identified in faculty members' descriptions of the feedback process: variability in feedback techniques, and the factors that influence how faculty staff think and feel about delivering feedback. Multiple approaches to feedback delivery were observed. Faculty members' tensions in balancing positive and negative feedback, their own perceived self-efficacy, their perceptions of the resident's insight, receptivity, skill and potential, the faculty member-resident relationship and contextual factors impacted the feedback process. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of feedback by faculty staff to residents after observing resident-patient interactions is a complex and dynamic process and is influenced by many factors. Understanding these cognitive and affective factors may provide insight into potential new approaches to faculty development to improve faculty staff's feedback skills and the effectiveness of their feedback.

Lost in transition: the experience and impact of frequent changes in the inpatient learning environment.

PURPOSE: The traditional "rotating" model of inpatient training remains the gold standard of residency, moving residents through different systems every two to four weeks. The authors studied the experience and impact of frequent transitions on residents. METHOD: This was a qualitative study. Ninety-seven individuals participated in 12 focus groups at three academic medical centers purposefully chosen to represent a range of geographic locations and structural characteristics. Four groups were held at each site: residents only, faculty only, nurses and ancillary staff only, and a mixed group. Grounded theory was used to analyze data. RESULTS: Perceived benefits of transitions included the ability to adapt to new environments and practice styles, improved organization and triage skills, increased comfort with stressful situations, and flexibility. Residents primarily relied on each other to cope with and prepare for transitions, with little support from the program or faculty level. Several potentially problematic workarounds were described within the context of transitions, including shortened progress notes, avoiding pages, hiding information, and sidestepping critical situations. Nearly all residents acknowledged that frequent transitions contributed to a lack of ownership and other potentially harmful effects for patient care. CONCLUSIONS: These findings challenge the value of the traditional "rotating" model in residency. As residents adapt to frequent transitioning, they implicitly learn to value flexibility and efficiency over relationship building and deep system knowledge. These findings raise significant implications for professional development and patient care and highlight an important element of the hidden curriculum embedded within the current training model.

The roles of practice systems and individual effort in quality performance.

INTRODUCTION: Individual effort and practice systems contribute to quality performance, but the nature of their contributions remains unclear. METHODS: This study assessed the roles of individual attributes and behaviours versus practice attributes in quality performance by assessing general internists' perceptions of factors that drive their engagement in quality improvement (QI). The authors interviewed 20 physicians in two distinct categories from diverse practice settings who had the greatest discordance between their ranked scores on standardised measures of individual quality performance and practice 'systems' performance. RESULTS: Findings suggest that there are subtle but important differences between high-scoring physicians practising in low-scoring practice systems, and low-scoring physicians practising in high-scoring practice systems with regards to quality performance and improvement. Physicians with high individual and low systems scores contributed a greater individual effort in quality improvement (QI), exhibited greater internal drivers to change, and reported a greater number and broader list of QI activities than physicians with low individual scores and high systems scores. Physicians with high individual scores also tended to be more reflective. There was a lack of consensus between categories on the relative usefulness of different systems resources, including electronic information systems. Our findings also suggest that physicians practice in isolation and autonomously, and highly independent of each other, and perceive a tension between pursuing technical quality and patient satisfaction at the same time. Both categories were skeptical of performance measurement more generally. CONCLUSION: QI efforts may be more effective if they foster both specific individual attitudes and capabilities, as well as improve practice-level systems.

Organisational strategies to cultivate professional values and behaviours.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been increased focus on the importance of professionalism among medical students, residents and practising physicians, as well as the interaction between individual behaviours and the practice environment. METHODS: Recognising the need to better understand how organisations advance professional behaviours, the authors undertook an exploratory, qualitative study. This study consisted of screening interviews with 30 organisations. Staff and an expert advisory committee developed criteria to select 10 organisations for further study. The authors then conducted in-depth interviews with two leaders from each of the 10 organisations. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Qualitative analysis revealed several key findings, including diversity in the language that organisations used regarding professionalism, and the professional behaviours that they chose to promote. Despite this diversity, all organisations shared a common strategy of clearly articulating their values and reinforcing these values. This reinforcement occurred through the provision of aligned organisational systems and structures, and the cultivation of strong interpersonal relationships. To better illustrate these findings, the authors provide several examples that demonstrate how organisational leaders use values to cultivate professional behaviour in their organisations.

The role of physician engagement on the impact of the hospital-based practice improvement module (PIM).

BACKGROUND: Physicians play an important role in hospital quality improvement (QI) activities. The Hospital-Based Practice Improvement Module (Hospital PIM) is a web-based assessment tool designed by the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) to facilitate physician involvement in QI as a part of maintaining certification. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to explore the impact of the Hospital PIM on physicians participating in hospital-based QI. DESIGN: Qualitative design consisting of semistructured telephone interviews. PARTICIPANTS: A purposeful sample of 21 early-completers of the Hospital PIM. MEASUREMENTS: Grounded-theory analysis was used to analyze transcripts of the semistructured telephone interviews. RESULTS: Physician completers of the Hospital PIM describe the impact in a variety of ways, including new learning about QI principles and activities, added value to their practice, and enhanced QI experience. An emerging theme was the mediating role of physician engagement in relation to the overall impact of the Hospital PIM. Four case studies illustrate these findings. Facilitators and barriers that influence the overall experience of the PIM are described. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of completing the Hospital PIM is mediated by the degree of physician engagement with the QI process. Physicians who become engaged with the Hospital PIM and QI process may be more likely to report successful experiences in implementing QI activities in hospital settings than those who do not become engaged.

The impact of a preventive cardiology quality improvement intervention on residents and clinics: a qualitative exploration.

Teaching and evaluating quality improvement (QI) is one corollary of new competency requirements in practice- and systems-based learning and improvement. This study explored the impact of the Preventive Cardiology Practice Improvement Module (PC- PIM) on residency clinics. Results from 22 clinic interviews indicated merit in using the PC-PIM to teach QI during residency. Many residents reported increased knowledge and confidence, particularly regarding the value of QI. The majority recognized that QI often leads to improved patient care and outcomes, even in resource poor environments. Conducting aspects of the QI process themselves (eg, chart audit, decision making) led to greater awareness of the patient and systems perspectives. Barriers included a lack of resident buy-in, discontinuity of care, and a lack of institutional support. These findings shed light on how residency clinics engage in QI activities and may aid in the implementation of future QI initiatives in residency more generally.