Rethinking Remediation: A Model to Support the Detailed Diagnosis of Clinicians' Performance Problems and the Development of Effective Remediation Plans

Remediation programmes for practising doctors to restore patient safety: the RESTORE realist review

Background

An underperforming doctor puts patient safety at risk. Remediation is an intervention intended to address underperformance and return a doctor to safe practice. Used in health-care systems all over the world, it has clear implications for both patient safety and doctor retention in the workforce. However, there is limited evidence underpinning remediation programmes, particularly a lack of knowledge as to why and how a remedial intervention may work to change a doctor’s practice.

Objectives

To (1) conduct a realist review of the literature to ascertain why, how, in what contexts, for whom and to what extent remediation programmes for practising doctors work to restore patient safety; and (2) provide recommendations on tailoring, implementation and design strategies to improve remediation interventions for doctors.

Design

A realist review of the literature underpinned by the Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards quality and reporting standards.

Data sources

Searches of bibliographic databases were conducted in June 2018 using the following databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, and Health Management Information Consortium. Grey literature searches were conducted in June 2019 using the following: Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA), OpenGrey, NHS England, North Grey Literature Collection, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Evidence, Electronic Theses Online Service, Health Systems Evidence and Turning Research into Practice. Further relevant studies were identified via backward citation searching, searching the libraries of the core research team and through a stakeholder group.

Review methods

Realist review is a theory-orientated and explanatory approach to the synthesis of evidence that seeks to develop programme theories about how an intervention produces its effects. We developed a programme theory of remediation by convening a stakeholder group and undertaking a systematic search of the literature. We included all studies in the English language on the remediation of practising doctors, all study designs, all health-care settings and all outcome measures. We extracted relevant sections of text relating to the programme theory. Extracted data were then synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to identify context–mechanism–outcome configurations.

Results

A total of 141 records were included. Of the 141 studies included in the review, 64% related to North America and 14% were from the UK. The majority of studies (72%) were published between 2008 and 2018. A total of 33% of articles were commentaries, 30% were research papers, 25% were case studies and 12% were other types of articles. Among the research papers, 64% were quantitative, 19% were literature reviews, 14% were qualitative and 3% were mixed methods. A total of 40% of the articles were about junior doctors/residents, 31% were about practicing physicians, 17% were about a mixture of both (with some including medical students) and 12% were not applicable. A total of 40% of studies focused on remediating all areas of clinical practice, including medical knowledge, clinical skills and professionalism. A total of 27% of studies focused on professionalism only, 19% focused on knowledge and/or clinical skills and 14% did not specify. A total of 32% of studies described a remediation intervention, 16% outlined strategies for designing remediation programmes, 11% outlined remediation models and 41% were not applicable. Twenty-nine context–mechanism–outcome configurations were identified. Remediation programmes work when they develop doctors’ insight and motivation, and reinforce behaviour change. Strategies such as providing safe spaces, using advocacy to develop trust in the remediation process and carefully framing feedback create contexts in which psychological safety and professional dissonance lead to the development of insight. Involving the remediating doctor in remediation planning can provide a perceived sense of control in the process and this, alongside correcting causal attribution, goal-setting, destigmatising remediation and clarity of consequences, helps motivate doctors to change. Sustained change may be facilitated by practising new behaviours and skills and through guided reflection.

Limitations

Limitations were the low quality of included literature and limited number of UK-based studies.

Future work

Future work should use the recommendations to optimise the delivery of existing remediation programmes for doctors in the NHS.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018088779.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Remediation for surgical trainees: recommendations from a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Remediation involves formalized support for surgical trainees with significant underperformance to return to expected standards. There is a need to understand current evidence of remediation for surgical trainees to inform practice and justify investment of resources.

METHODS

Following the principles of a systematic review, we conducted a narrative analysis to make recommendations for remediation of underperforming surgical trainees.

RESULTS

From a review of 55 articles on remediation of trainees in medical and surgical sub-specialities, we have identified system and process level recommendations. Remediation is reported as long-term, complex and resource-intensive. Establishing a defined and standardized remediation framework enables co-ordination of multi-modal interventions. System level recommendations aim to consolidate protocols via developing better assessment, intervention and re-evaluation modalities whilst also strengthening support to supervisors conducting the remediation. Process level recommendations should be tailored for the specific needs of each trainee, aiming to be proactive with interventions within a programmatic framework. Regular reassessment is required, and long-term follow-up shows that remediation efforts are often successful.

CONCLUSION

While remediation within a programmatic framework is complex, it is often a successful approach to return surgical trainees to their expected standard. Future directions involve applying learning theories, encouraging research methods and to develop integrated collaborate protocols and support to synergize efforts.

Remediating professionalism lapses in medical students and doctors: A systematic review

CONTEXT

A remediation intervention aims to facilitate the improvement of an individual whose competence in a particular skill has dropped below the level expected. Little is known regarding the effectiveness of remediation, especially in the area of professionalism. This review sought to identify and assess the effectiveness of interventions to remediate professionalism lapses in medical students and doctors.

METHODS

Databases Embase, MEDLINE, Education Resources Information Center and the British Education Index were searched in September 2017 and October 2018. Studies reporting interventions to remediate professionalism lapses in medical students and doctors were included. A standardised data extraction form incorporating a previously described behaviour change technique taxonomy was utilised. A narrative synthesis approach was adopted. Quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies on remediation interventions reported in 23 articles were identified. Of these, 13 were case studies, five were cohort studies and one was a qualitative study; 37% targeted doctors, 26% medical students, 16% residents and 21% involved mixed populations. Most interventions were multifaceted and addressed professionalism issues concomitantly with clinical skills, but some focused on specific areas (eg sexual boundaries and disruptive behaviours). Most used three or more behaviour change techniques. The included studies were predominantly of low quality as 13 of the 19 were case studies. It was difficult to assess the effectiveness of the interventions as the majority of studies did not carry out any evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The review identifies a paucity of evidence to guide best practice in the remediation of professionalism lapses in medical students and doctors. The literature tentatively suggests that remediating lapses in professionalism, as part of a wider programme of remediation, can facilitate participants to graduate from a programme of study, and pass medical licensing and mock oral board examinations. However, it is not clear from this literature whether these interventions are successful in remediating lapses in professionalism specifically. Further research is required to improve the design and evaluation of interventions to remediate professionalism lapses.

Remediating doctors' performance to restore patient safety: a realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Underperformance by doctors poses a risk to patient safety. Remediation is an intervention designed to remedy underperformance and return a doctor to safe practice. Remediation is widely used across healthcare systems globally, and has clear implications for both patient safety and doctor retention. Yet, there is a poor evidence base to inform remediation programmes. In particular, there is a lack of understanding as to why and how a remedial intervention may work to change a doctor's practice. The aim of this research is to identify why, how, in what contexts, for whom and to what extent remediation programmes for practising doctors work to support patient safety.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Realist review is an approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to develop programme theories about how an intervention works to produce its effects. The initial search strategy will involve: database and grey literature searching, citation searching and contacting authors. The evidence search will be extended as the review progresses and becomes more focused on the development of specific aspects of the programme theory. The development of the programme theory will involve input from a stakeholder group consisting of professional experts in the remediation process and patient representatives. Evidence synthesis will use a realist logic of analysis to interrogate data in order to develop and refine the initial programme theory into a more definitive realist programme theory of how remediation works. The study will follow and be reported according to Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses-Evolving Standards (RAMESES).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required. Our dissemination strategy will include input from our stakeholder group. Customised outputs will be developed using the knowledge-to-action cycle framework, and will be targeted to: policy-makers; education providers and regulators, the National Health Service, doctors and academics.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018088779.