The American Society for Clinical Pathology resident in-service examination: does resident performance provide insight into the effectiveness of clinical pathology education?

Detecting residents at risk of attrition - A Singapore pathology residency's experience

The SingHealth Pathology Residency Program (SHPRP) is a 5-year postgraduate training program in Singapore. We face the problem of resident attrition, which has a significant impact on the individual, program and healthcare providers. Our residents are regularly evaluated, using in-house evaluations as well as assessments required in our partnership with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education International (ACGME-I). We hence sought to determine if these assessments were able to distinguish residents who would attrite from residents who would graduate successfully. Retrospective analysis of existing residency assessments was performed on all residents who have separated from SHPRP and compared with residents currently in senior residency or graduated from the program. Statistical analysis was performed on quantitative assessment methods of Resident In-Service Examination (RISE), 360-degree feedback, faculty assessment, Milestones and our own annual departmental mock examination. Word frequency analysis of narrative feedback from faculty assessment was used to generate themes. Since 2011, 10 out of 34 residents have separated from the program. RISE, Milestone data and the departmental mock examination showed statistical significance in discriminating residents at risk of attrition for specialty-related reasons from successful residents. Analysis of narrative feedback showed that successful residents performed better in areas of organization, preparation with clinical history, application of knowledge, interpersonal communication and achieving sustained progress. Existing assessment methods used in our pathology residency program are effective in detecting residents at risk of attrition. This also suggests applications in the way that we select, assess and teach residents.

Can ACGME Milestones predict surgical specialty board passage: an example in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Background:

Multiple tools including Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) standardized milestones can be utilized to assess trainee and residency program performance. However, little is known regarding the objective validation of these tools in predicting written board passage.

Methods:

In this retrospective study, data was gathered on n = 45 Wayne State University Obstetrics and Gynecology program graduates over the five-year period ending July 2018. United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CREOG) in-training scores and ACGME milestones were used to predict American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) board passage success on first attempt. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results:

Written board passage was associated with average CREOGs (p = 0.01) and milestones (p = 0.008) while USMLE1 was not significantly associated (p = 0.055). USMLE1 <217 (Positive predictive value (PPV) = 96%). CREOGs <197 (PPV = 100%) and milestones <3.25 (PPV = 100%), particularly practice-based learning and systems-based practice milestones were most strongly correlated with board failure. Using a combination of these two milestones, it is possible to correctly predict board passage using our model (PPV = 86%).

Discussion:

This study is the first validating the utility of milestones in a surgical specialty by demonstrating their ability to predict board passage. Residents with CREOGs or milestones below thresholds are at risk for board failure and may warrant early intervention.

Quantification of the Effectiveness of a Residency Program Using the Resident In-Service Examination

This study describes a quantitative tool in the assessment of residency programs, in which national ranking of residents after the resident in-service examination in postgraduate year 4 is compared to that in postgraduate year 1. The relationship between training and changes in ranking, resident in-service examination results before and after training in specific areas are also compared. To illustrate the use of this novel approach, data from a large residency program were analyzed. The 70 residents were ranked as a postgraduate year 1 group at the 50th national percentile. As postgraduate year 4 residents, they were ranked at the 59th percentile, a significant (P < .003) improvement. There was moderate correlation between performance in postgraduate year 1 and that in postgraduate year 4 (0.61); however, initial ranking was no indication of the final (R2 = .34), with the exception of high performers. Training in specific areas improved ranking, demonstrating association between training and performance. In conclusion, the effectiveness of training provided by a residency program can be quantified using the resident in-service examination. This should provide a quantitative tool in the assessment of postgraduate programs.

Teaching Laboratory Management Principles and Practices Through Mentorship and Graduated Responsibility: The Assistant Medical Directorship

With the changing landscape of medicine in general, and pathology in particular, a greater emphasis is being placed on laboratory management as a means of controlling spiraling medical costs and improving health-care efficiency. To meet this challenge, pathology residency programs have begun to incorporate formal laboratory management training into their curricula, using institutional curricula and/or online laboratory management courses offered by professional organizations. At the University of Utah, and its affiliated national reference laboratory, ARUP Laboratories, Inc, interested residents are able to supplement the departmental lecture-based and online laboratory management curriculum by participating in assistant medical directorship programs in one of several pathology subspecialty disciplines. The goals of many of the assistant medical directorship positions include the development of laboratory management skills and competencies. A survey of current and recent assistant medical directorship participants revealed that the assistant medical directorship program serves as an excellent means of improving laboratory management skills, as well as improving performance as a fellow and practicing pathologist.

Attitudes and Beliefs of Pathology Residents Regarding the Subspecialty of Clinical Chemistry: Results of a Survey

Context.—Previous studies suggest that training in pathology residency programs does not adequately prepare pathology residents to become competent in clinical chemistry.

Objectives.—To define the beliefs of pathology residents in the United States regarding their preparation for practicing clinical chemistry in their career, their attitude toward the discipline, and the attractiveness of clinical chemistry as a career.

Design.—The residents of all pathology residency programs in the United States were given the opportunity to participate in an online survey.

Results.—Three hundred thirty-six pathology residents responded to the survey. Analysis of the survey results indicates that pathology residents are more likely to believe that their income may be lower if they select a career that has a clinical chemistry focus and that their faculty do not value clinical chemistry as much as the anatomic pathology part of the residency. Residents also report that clinical chemistry is not as enjoyable as anatomic pathology rotations during residency or preferable as a sole career path. A large proportion of residents also believe that they will be slightly prepared or not prepared to practice clinical chemistry by the end of their residency and that they do not have enough background and/or time to learn clinical chemistry during their residency programs to be able to practice this specialty effectively post graduation.

Conclusions.—Our survey results suggest that many pathology residents do not have a positive attitude toward clinical chemistry and do not experience a supportive learning environment with an expectation that they will become competent in clinical chemistry with a residency alone.

A Required Rotation in Clinical Laboratory Management for Pathology Residents: Five-Year Experience at Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine

Leadership and management training during pathology residency have been identified repeatedly by employers as insufficient. A 1-month rotation in clinical laboratory management (CLM) was created for third-year pathology residents. We report on our experience and assess the value of this rotation. The rotation was one-half observational and one-half active. The observational component involved being a member of department and laboratory service line leadership, both at the departmental and institutional level. Observational participation enabled learning of both the content and principles of leadership and management activities. The active half of the rotation was performance of a project intended to advance the strategic trajectory of the department and laboratory service line. In our program that matriculates 4 residents per year, 20 residents participated from April 2010 through December 2015. Their projects either activated a new priority area or helped propel an existing strategic priority forward. Of the 16 resident graduates who had obtained their first employment or a fellowship position, 9 responded to an assessment survey. The majority of respondents (5/9) felt that the rotation significantly contributed to their ability to compete for a fellowship or their first employment position. The top reported benefits of the rotation included people management; communication with staff, departmental, and institutional leadership; and involvement in department and institutional meetings and task groups. Our 5-year experience demonstrates both the successful principles by which the CLM rotation can be established and the high value of this rotation to residency graduates.

Senior pathology resident in-service examination scores correlate with outcomes of the American Board of Pathology certifying examinations

The Resident In-Service Examination (RISE) addresses 1 area of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Outcome Project; RISE results demonstrate progressive attainment of pathology knowledge during training. We compared RISE scores with primary pathology board certification success for residents graduating in 2008 and 2009. Overall RISE and nearly all sectional scores in anatomic and clinical pathology were significantly higher for residents passing all certifying examinations at the first attempt vs residents who failed any examination. The risk of failing increased with each lower quartile of overall RISE score, such that 34% (2009) and 54% (2008) of residents in the lowest quartile failed at least 1 certifying examination. Two thirds of graduating residents with lowest quartile scores had a similar quartile ranking in the previous RISE, identifying them as at risk. Residents passing the American Board of Pathology certifying examinations have a higher level of medical knowledge in general and specific pathology disciplines as assessed by senior RISE scores.

Fellowship Trends of Pathology Residents

Context.—Recent changes in pathology residency education have included a decrease in the program length (from 5 years to 4 years for combined anatomic and clinical pathology training) and a national mandate for programs to assess 6 general competencies of trainees. These have undoubtedly led to changes in program curricula and in residents' desires to seek fellowship training.

Objective.—This study was designed to gather information about what residents are seeking from fellowship training programs.

Design.—This study used an online survey to assess attitudes of residents in training programs toward fellowship training. The survey instrument had 26 questions pertaining to fellowship choices, motivations for pursuing fellowships, expectations of the fellowships, and postresidency concerns.

Results.—There were 213 respondents from a mix of program types and representing each postgraduate year. Most residents will seek at least 1 or 2 fellowships after residency training. The most popular first-choice fellowship was surgical pathology (26%), followed by cytopathology (16%), hematopathology (15%), gastrointestinal pathology (10%), dermatopathology (8%), and forensic pathology (5%). The most common reasons for pursuing fellowship training were to “increase marketability” (43%) or to “become an expert in a particular area” (33%). Most trainees got their information about fellowship training programs from Internet sources.

Conclusions.—Fellowship programs will benefit from an optimally designed Web site because residents seek information predominantly from the Internet. Residents seeking fellowships are particularly concerned with selecting programs that provide job connections, an increase in their marketability, and the opportunity to develop diagnostic expertise.

Meeting the curriculum needs for different career paths in Laboratory Medicine

There are a number of career paths in Laboratory Medicine and several clinical practice models for the discipline. This article summarizes the state of current training at the medical student and residency/post-graduate levels, emphasizing practice in the U.S., and the challenges of education in the discipline to meet the needs of diverse career paths. Data regarding effectiveness of current pedagogical approaches are discussed along with a brief review of evolving didactic methodologies. The recently published curriculum in Laboratory Medicine (Clinical Pathology) by the Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists is reviewed, including its major emphases and the importance of competency assessment. Finally, the future of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology and the need to train for that future is expanded upon.