Resident and Preceptor Perceptions of Preceptor Integration Into Resident Clinic Scheduling Templates.

BACKGROUND: Some internal medicine residency programs on X+Y schedules have modified clinic preceptor schedules to mimic those of the resident cohort (resident matched). This is in contrast to a traditional model, in which preceptors supervise on the same half-day each week. OBJECTIVE: We assessed preceptor and resident perceptions of the 2 precepting models. METHODS: We surveyed 44 preceptors and 97 residents at 3 clinic sites in 2 academic medical centers. Two clinics used the resident-matched model, and 1 used a traditional model. Surveys were completed at 6 months and 1 year. We assessed resident and preceptor perceptions in 5 domains: relationships between residents and preceptors; preceptor familiarity with complex patients; preceptor ability to assess milestone achievements; ability to follow up on results; and quality of care. RESULTS: There was no difference in perceptions of interpersonal relationships or satisfaction with patient care. Preceptors in the resident-matched schedule reported they were more familiar with complex patients at both 6 months and 1 year, and felt more comfortable evaluating residents' milestone achievements at 6 months, but not at 1 year. At 1 year, residents in the resident-matched model perceived preceptors were more familiar with complex patients than residents in the traditional model. The ability to discuss patient results between clinic weeks was low in both models. CONCLUSIONS: The resident-matched model increased resident and preceptor perceptions of familiarity with complex patients and early preceptor perceptions of comfort in assessment of milestone achievements.

Evaluating nonphysician staff members' self-perceived ability to provide multisource evaluations of residents.

BACKGROUND: Multisource evaluations of residents offer valuable feedback, yet there is little evidence on the best way to collect these data from a range of health care professionals. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated nonphysician staff members' ability to assess internal medicine residents' performance and behavior, and explored whether staff members differed in their perceived ability to participate in resident evaluations. METHODS: We distributed an anonymous survey to nurses, medical assistants, and administrative staff at 6 internal medicine residency continuity clinics. Differences between nurses and other staff members' perceived ability to evaluate resident behavior were examined using independent t tests. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 82% (61 of 74). A total of 55 respondents (90%) reported that it was important for them to evaluate residents. Participants reported being able to evaluate professional behaviors very well (62% [36 of 58] on the domain of respect to staff; 61% [36 of 59] on attire; and 54% [32 of 59] on communication). Individuals without a clinical background reported being uncomfortable evaluating medical knowledge (60%; 24 of 40) and judgment (55%; 22 of 40), whereas nurses reported being more comfortable evaluating these competencies. Respondents reported that the biggest barrier to evaluation was limited contact (86%; 48 of 56), and a significant amount of feedback was given verbally rather than on written evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: Nonphysician staff members agree it is important to evaluate residents, and they are most comfortable providing feedback on professional behaviors. A significant amount of feedback is provided verbally but not necessarily captured in a formal written evaluation process.