Remediation in Practice: A Polarity to be Managed

'The program director's word … it's stronger than the word of God': Epistemic injustice revealed through narratives of remediated graduate medical education residents

BACKGROUND

Though graduate medical education (GME) residency training provides positive experiences for many trainees, it may also result in major stressors and negative experiences, particularly for those requiring remediation. Residents requiring remediation may experience feelings of dismay, shame and guilt that can negatively affect their training, self-efficacy and their medical careers. Power differentials between educators and residents may set the stage for epistemic injustice, which is injustice resulting from the silencing or dismissing a speaker based on identity prejudice. This can lead to decreased willingness of trainees to engage with learning. There is a paucity of literature that explores GME experiences of remediation from the resident perspective.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the narratives of physician experiences of remediation during residency through the lens of epistemic injustice.

METHODS

Between January and July 2022, we interviewed US physicians who self-identified as having experienced remediation during residency. They shared events that led to remediation, personal perspectives and emotions about the process and resulting outcomes. Interviews were analysed using narrative analysis with attention to instances of epistemic injustice.

RESULTS

We interviewed 10 participants from diverse backgrounds, specialties and institutions. All participants described contextual factors that likely contributed to their remediation: (1) previous academic difficulty/nontraditional path into medicine, (2) medical disability or (3) minoritised race, gender or sexual identity. Participants felt that these backgrounds made them more vulnerable in their programmes despite attempts to express their needs. Participants reported instances of deflated credibility and epistemic injustices with important effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Participant narratives highlighted that deep power and epistemic imbalances between learners and educators can imperil GME trainees' psychological safety, resulting in instances of professional and personal harm. Our study suggests applying an existing framework to help programme directors (PDs) approach remediation with epistemic humility.

Post graduate remediation programs in medicine: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Recognizing that physicians may struggle to achieve knowledge, skills, attitudes and or conduct at one or more stages during their training has highlighted the importance of the 'deliberate practice of improving performance through practising beyond one's comfort level under guidance'. However, variations in physician, program, contextual and healthcare and educational systems complicate efforts to create a consistent approach to remediation. Balancing the inevitable disparities in approaches and settings with the need for continuity and effective oversight of the remediation process, as well as the context and population specific nature of remediation, this review will scrutinise the remediation of physicians in training to better guide the design, structuring and oversight of new remediation programs.

METHODS

Krishna's Systematic Evidence Based Approach is adopted to guide this Systematic Scoping Review (SSR in SEBA) to enhance the transparency and reproducibility of this review. A structured search for articles on remediation programs for licenced physicians who have completed their pre-registration postings and who are in training positions published between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, Google Scholar, PsycINFO, ASSIA, HMIC, DARE and Web of Science databases was carried out. The included articles were concurrently thematically and content analysed using SEBA's Split Approach. Similarities in the identified themes and categories were combined in the Jigsaw Perspective and compared with the tabulated summaries of included articles in the Funnelling Process to create the domains that will guide discussions.

RESULTS

The research team retrieved 5512 abstracts, reviewed 304 full-text articles and included 101 articles. The domains identified were characteristics, indications, frameworks, domains, enablers and barriers and unique features of remediation in licenced physicians in training programs.

CONCLUSION

Building upon our findings and guided by Hauer et al. approach to remediation and Taylor and Hamdy's Multi-theories Model, we proffer a theoretically grounded 7-stage evidence-based remediation framework to enhance understanding of remediation in licenced physicians in training programs. We believe this framework can guide program design and reframe remediation's role as an integral part of training programs and a source of support and professional, academic, research, interprofessional and personal development.