'Next steps are ': An exploration of coaching and feedback language in EPA assessment comments.

PURPOSE: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA) assessments are intended to facilitate meaningful, low-stakes coaching and feedback, partly through the provision of written comments. We sought to explore EPA assessment comments provided to internal medicine (IM) residents for evidence of feedback and coaching language as well as politeness. METHODS: We collected all written comments from EPA assessments of communication from a first-year IM resident cohort at the University of Toronto. Sensitized by politeness theory, we analyzed data using principles of constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: Nearly all EPA assessments (94%) contained written feedback based on focused clinical encounters. The majority of comments demonstrated coaching language, including phrases like 'don't forget to,' and 'next steps are,' followed by specific suggestions for improvement. A variety of words, including 'autonomy' and 'independence' denoted entrustment decisions. Linguistic politeness strategies such as hedging were pervasive, seemingly to minimize harm to the supervisor-trainee relationship. CONCLUSION: Evidence of written coaching feedback suggests that EPA assessment comments are being used as intended as a means of formative feedback to promote learning. Yet, the frequent use of polite language suggests that EPAs may be higher-stakes than expected, highlighting a need for changes to the assessment culture and improved feedback literacy.

Dressing the Part: Gender Differences in Residents' Experiences of Feedback in Internal Medicine.

PURPOSE: Multiple studies demonstrate that assessment of residents differs by gender, yet little is known about how these differences are experienced by women and men. The authors sought to understand whether the experience of being assessed and receiving feedback differs between men and women internal medicine (IM) residents and how women respond to these experiences. METHOD: A constructivist grounded theory approach to data collection and interpretation was used. The authors invited all IM residents in postgraduate years 1-3 at the University of Toronto to participate in semistructured focus groups (August-October 2019). Twenty-two residents participated (8 men, 14 women). Focus groups were divided by gender and training level. RESULTS: The authors found a profound difference in experiences of receiving feedback between men and women residents. The themes of challenges to power and authority, tactics to reestablish power and authority, conflicting feedback from attendings, and ways of moving forward all diverged between men and women residents. Women repeatedly brought up feedback outside of official assessment moments and relied on symbols, such as a white coat, stethoscope, and demure clothing, to "dress the part" of a physician. Women also encountered conflicting feedback from supervisors regarding confidence and assertiveness (e.g., sometimes told to be more assertive, other times to be less), often resulting in self-censorship; similar feedback was rarely noted by men. CONCLUSIONS: Gendered differences in the experiences of being assessed and receiving feedback are not always reflected in standard measures. Gender and medicine can be considered performative, and these findings demonstrate women IM residents integrate multiple forms of feedback to create the persona of the woman physician. The authors believe this research contributes a unique vantage point to the experience of women residents interpreting explicit and implicit feedback in IM and highlights the socialization that occurs to become a woman physician.

The Senior Medical Resident's New Role in Assessment in Internal Medicine.

PURPOSE: With the introduction of competency-based medical education, senior residents have taken on a new, formalized role of completing assessments of their junior colleagues. However, no prior studies have explored the role of near-peer assessment within the context of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and competency-based medical education. This study explored internal medicine residents' perceptions of near-peer feedback and assessment in the context of EPAs. METHOD: Semistructured interviews were conducted from September 2019 to March 2020 with 16 internal medicine residents (8 first-year residents and 8 second- and third-year residents) at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Interviews were conducted and coded iteratively within a constructivist grounded theory approach until sufficiency was reached. RESULTS: Senior residents noted a tension in their dual roles of coach and assessor when completing EPAs. Senior residents managed the relationship with junior residents to not upset the learner and potentially harm the team dynamic, leading to the documentation of often inflated EPA ratings. Junior residents found senior residents to be credible providers of feedback; however, they were reticent to find senior residents credible as assessors. CONCLUSIONS: Although EPAs have formalized moments of feedback, senior residents struggled to include constructive feedback comments, all while knowing the assessment decisions may inform the overall summative decision of their peers. As a result, EPA ratings were often inflated. The utility of having senior residents serve as assessors needs to be reexamined because there is concern that this new role has taken away the benefits of having a senior resident act solely as a coach.

Improving Transitions of Care between the Intensive Care Unit and General Internal Medicine Ward. A Demonstration Study.

Background: In-hospital transfers such as from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the general internal medicine (GIM) ward place patients at risk of adverse events. A structured handover tool may improve transitions from the ICU to the GIM ward. Objective: To develop, implement, and evaluate a customized user-designed transfer tool to improve transitions from the ICU to the GIM ward. Methods: This was a pre-post intervention study at a tertiary academic hospital. We developed and implemented a user-designed, structured, handwritten ICU-to-GIM transfer tool. The tool included active medical issues, functional status, medications and medication changes, consulting services, code status, and emergency contact information. Transfer tool users included GIM physicians, ICU physicians, and critical care rapid response team nurses. An implementation audit and mixed qualitative and quantitative analysis of pre-post survey responses was used to evaluate clinician satisfaction and the perceived quality of patient transfers. Results: The pre-post survey response rate was 51.8% (99/191). Respondents included GIM residents (58.5%), ICU rapid response team physicians and nurses (24.2%), and GIM attending physicians (17.2%). Less than half of clinicians (48.8%) reported that the preintervention transfer process was adequate. Clinicians who used the transfer tool reported that the transfer process was improved (93.3% vs. 48.8%, P = 0.03). Clinician-reported understanding of medication changes in the ICU increased (69.2% vs. 29.1%, P = 0.004), as did their ability to plan for a safe hospital discharge (69.2% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.01). However, only 64.2% of audited transfers used the tool. Frequently omitted sections included home medications (missing in 83.4% of audits), new medications (33.3%), and secondary diagnosis (33.3%). Thematic analysis of free-text responses identified areas for improvement including clarifying the course of ICU events and enhancing tool usability. Conclusion: A user-designed, structured, handwritten transfer tool may improve the perceived quality of patient transfers from the ICU to the GIM wards.

Tensions in Assessment: The Realities of Entrustment in Internal Medicine.

PURPOSE: A key unit of assessment in competency-based medical education (CBME) is the entrustable professional activity. The variations in how entrustment is perceived and enacted across specialties are not well understood. This study aimed to develop a thorough understanding of the process, concept, and language of entrustment as it pertains to internal medicine (IM). METHOD: Attending supervisors of IM trainees on the clinical teaching unit were purposively sampled. Sixteen semistructured interviews were conducted and analyzed using constructivist grounded theory. The study was conducted at the University of Toronto from January to September 2018. RESULTS: Five major themes were elucidated. First, the concepts of entrustment, trust, and competence are not easily distinguished and sometimes conflated. Second, entrustment decisions are not made by attendings, but rather are often automatic and predetermined by program or trainee level. Third, entrustment is not a discrete, point-in-time assessment due to longitudinality of tasks and supervisor relationships with trainees. Fourth, entrustment scale language does not reflect attendings' decision making. Fifth, entrustment decisions affect the attending more than the resident. CONCLUSIONS: A tension arises between the need for a common language of CBME and the need for authentic representation of supervision within each specialty. With new assessment instruments required to operationalize the tenets of CBME, it becomes critically important to understand the nuanced and specialty-specific language of entrustment to ensure validity of assessments.

Unearthing Faculty and Trainee Perspectives of Feedback in Internal Medicine: the Oral Case Presentation as a Model.

BACKGROUND: The case presentation is a fundamental activity used in both patient care and trainee education, partly due to feedback from supervisor to trainee. Although feedback in medical education is well studied, prior studies have not focused on the perceptions of feedback by Internal Medicine supervisors and trainees as it relates to clinical activities like the case presentation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight Internal Medicine physicians, and 18 Internal Medicine trainees (5 medical students, 13 residents) at the University of Toronto. Purposive sampling was used. Interviews were conducted and coded iteratively within a constructivist grounded theory approach until saturation was reached. RESULTS: Supervisors and trainees recognized feedback as an important part of the case presentation that can be (1) explicit, labeled feedback or (2) implicit, unlabeled feedback. Both trainees and supervisors perceived that not enough feedback occurs, likely stemming from a hesitancy by supervisors to label implicit feedback, calling it an interruption instead. Although trainees were keenly aware of non-verbal feedback from their supervisors as implicit feedback, they often interpreted explicit constructive feedback negatively. Interestingly, the same feedback from senior residents was regarded as highly educational, as it was uncoupled from assessment. CONCLUSION: Feedback occurs more frequently in case presentations than previously described, particularly in an implicit, unlabeled format. Even though under-recognized, trainees identify and utilize implicit feedback from supervisors, and coaching from senior residents, to develop learned behaviors. This is reassuring in the age of Competency-Based Medical Education, as feedback has an essential role in workplace-based assessment and promotion.

Overshadowed by Assessment: Understanding Trainee and Supervisor Perspectives on the Oral Case Presentation in Internal Medicine Workplace-Based Assessment.

PURPOSE: The oral case presentation (OCP) is an essential part of daily clinical practice in internal medicine (IM) and a key competency in medical education. It is not known how supervisors and trainees perceive OCPs in workplace-based learning and assessment. METHOD: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, 26 semistructured interviews were held with trainees and supervisors (18 clinical clerks and first- through third-year postgraduate trainees, and 8 supervisors) on the IM clinical teaching unit at the University of Toronto, 2015-2016. Interviews focused on how the OCP was viewed by both trainees and supervisors in clinical practice as a tool for patient care, learning, and assessment. Iterative, constant comparative techniques were used to analyze the interviews and develop a framework to understand trainee and supervisor perspectives. RESULTS: Supervisors and trainees viewed the OCP as an important part of informal trainee assessment in IM. Supervisors used OCPs to understand the patient through trainee-demonstrated skills including the use of narratives, information synthesis, and management of uncertainty. However, because of awareness of assessment, trainees sought to control the OCP, viewing it as a performance demonstrating their competence, mediated by senior residents and tailored to supervisor preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Preoccupied with assessment around OCPs, trainees often lost sight of the valuable learning taking place. Use of OCPs in assessment necessitates optimization of the educational activity for trainees. Providing explicit direction to both trainees and supervisors, defining expectations, and clarifying the assessment activity of the OCP can optimize the encounter for best educational practice.