Leveraging faculty development to support validation of entrustable professional activities assessment tools in anatomic and clinical pathology training.

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are observable activities that define the practice of medicine and provide a framework of evaluation that has been incorporated into US medical school curricula in both undergraduate and graduate medical education. This manuscript describes the development of an entrustment scale and formative and summative evaluations for pathology EPAs, outlines a process for faculty development that was employed in a pilot study implementing two Anatomic Pathology and two Clinical Pathology EPAs in volunteer pathology residency programs, and provides initial validation data for the proposed pathology entrustment scales. Prior to implementation, faculty development was necessary to train faculty on the entrustment scale for each given activity. A "train the trainer" model used performance dimension training and frame of reference training to train key faculty at each institution. The session utilized vignettes to practice determination of entrustment ratings and development of feedback for trainees as to strengths and weaknesses in the performance of these activities. Validity of the entrustment scale is discussed using the Messick framework, based on concepts of content, response process, and internal structure. This model of entrustment scales, formative and summative assessments, and faculty development can be utilized for any pathology EPA and provides a roadmap for programs to design and implement EPA assessments into pathology residency training.

National pilot of entrustable professional activities in pathology residency training.

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are observable clinical skills and/or procedures that have been introduced into medical education at the student and resident levels in most specialties to determine readiness to advance into residency or independent practice, respectively. This publication describes the process and outcomes of a pilot study looking at the feasibility of using two anatomic pathology and two clinical pathology EPAs in pathology residency in 6 pathology residency programs that volunteered for the study. Faculty development on EPAs and their assessment was provided to pilot program faculty, and EPA assessment tools were developed and used by the pilot programs. Pre- and post-study surveys were given to participating residents, faculty, and program directors to gauge baseline practices and to gather feedback on the EPA implementation experience. Results demonstrated overall good feasibility in implementing EPAs. Faculty acceptance of EPAs varied and was less than that of program directors. Residents reported a significant increase in the frequency with which faculty provided formative assessments that included specific examples of performance and specific ways to improve, as well as increased frequency with which faculty provided summative assessments that included specific ways to improve. EPAs offered the most benefit in setting clear expectations for performance of each task, for providing more specific feedback to residents, and in increasing Program director's understanding of resident strengths abilities and weaknesses.

Career transitions: Reflections of former chairs and academic health center leaders.

The 2022 Association of Pathology Chairs Annual Meeting included a live discussion session and a pre-meeting recorded panel webinar sponsored by the Senior Fellows Group (former chairs of academic departments of pathology who have remained active in the Association of Pathology Chairs). The presentation was focused on transition planning for academic health center leaders. Each of the discussion group panelists had served as a pathology department chair as well as in more senior leadership positions, and they provided perspectives based upon their personal experiences. It was noted that such positions are often "at will" appointments of indeterminate length and that those above department chair generally carry greater risks and less stability. Becoming "addicted" to a leadership position was not considered beneficial to the individual or to the institution served and makes transitioning more difficult. Ongoing organizational succession planning was deemed helpful to mitigate such addiction and facilitate personal transition planning. Modes of transitioning discussed included those planned (e.g., voluntary retirement, resignation, administrative advancement) and unplanned (e.g., being "fired"; unexpected personal, health, or family issues). Unplanned transitions were felt to be more difficult, while anticipating when it is time to go and planning for it provided greater personal fulfillment after transition. Many career options were identified after serving in a leadership position, including a return to teaching, research, and/or clinical service; writing; mentoring; becoming more active in professional organizations and boards; philanthropic work; and "reinventing oneself" by moving to another career entirely.

Serving as a Temporary Pathology Chair: "Boon" or "Boondoggle"?

The 2019 Association of Pathology Chairs Annual Meeting included a discussion group sponsored by the Senior Fellows Group (former chairs of academic departments of pathology who have remained active in Association of Pathology Chairs) that was focused on serving as temporary pathology chair. Such positions include "acting chair" (service while the permanent chair is on leave or temporarily indisposed), "interim chair" (service after departure of the prior chair and before a new chair is appointed), "term-limited chair" (usually one nonrenewable term of less than 5 years), and "terminal chair" (permanent chair being asked to stay until a successor is appointed). Discussion group panelists represented each of these positions and included the perspective of 3 former deans about the rationale for making such appointments. The potential benefits and risks of serving in these roles were discussed. Issues addressed included acting as "caretaker manager" or "change-agent leader"; whether such service and experience would enhance or harm one's chances to become a permanent chair of that or another department; the effect of such service on academic productivity; the influence of department and institutional factors on the position; the range of authority provided, particularly in addressing significant problems affecting the department's future; and the impact of time served in these various positions. The "lame-duck" effect of prolonged service as "terminal chair" was also discussed. The observations and advice provided by the panelists and audience discussion are reported and may be useful for those considering service as temporary chair in pathology as well as other academic leadership positions.