24/7 attendings: "helicoptering" the housestaff?

Goldilocks and Entrustment: Finding the Amount of Learner Autonomy That's Just Right

INTRODUCTION

Faculty and residents strive for appropriate autonomy and entrustment. Initial direct supervision of clinical care gradually shifts to increasing levels of resident independence over time. Faculty members are inconsistent in resident supervision leading to missed opportunities for resident independence.

METHODS

Family medicine faculty workshop participants completed teaching style self-evaluations prior to discussion of clinical examples with excessive or insufficient autonomy. Participants reviewed real resident feedback examples to increase insight into teaching styles. Participants were presented with cases to discuss varying degrees of resident autonomy and entrustment. Learners committed to one specific behavior to calibrate the degree of autonomy they provide.

RESULTS

Of the faculty, 113 members participated in the workshop with the majority (98%) finding the workshop relevant in helping them to identify strategies for reflecting on their degree of autonomy allowed and to look for appropriate situations for enhancing their resident entrustment.

DISCUSSION

This interactive workshop provided clear ways for addressing the issue of independence versus control in supervision of patient care. It provided a feedback mechanism for educators who provide too much or too little autonomy for the best resident learning. Additionally, this conversation encouraged participants to engage in self-reflection on the autonomy given to their resident.

Learning to drive: resident physicians' perceptions of how attending physicians promote and undermine autonomy

BACKGROUND

Providing appropriate levels of autonomy to resident physicians is an important facet of graduate medical education, allowing learners to progress toward the ultimate goal of independent practice. While studies have identified the importance of autonomy to the development of resident physicians, less is known about resident perspectives on their "lived experiences" with autonomy and ways in which clinical educators either promote or undermine it. The current study aims to provide an empirically based practical framework based on resident perspectives through which supervising physicians can attempt to more adequately foster resident physician autonomy.

METHODS

Residents completed open ended surveys followed by facilitated group discussions of their perspectives on autonomy. Qualitative thematic analysis identified key themes in resident definitions of autonomy and how clinical educators either promote or undermine resident autonomy during supervision. Fifty-nine resident physicians representing six different specialties from two institutions participated.

RESULTS

Learners felt that autonomy was critical to their development as independent physicians. Leading the approach to care, a sense of ownership for patients, and receiving appropriate levels of supervision were identified as key components of autonomy. Attending physicians who promoted this active involvement with patient care were felt to have a strong positive influence on resident autonomy. Autonomy was undermined when decisions were micromanaged and resident input in decision-making process was minimized.

CONCLUSIONS

Fostering autonomy is a critical aspect of medical education. Allowing residents to take the lead in the delivery of patient care while supporting them as important members of the health care team can help to promote resident autonomy in the clinical setting.