Assessing and Documenting the Cognitive Performance of Family Medicine Residents Practicing Outpatient Medicine

Applying Bloom's taxonomy in clinical surgery: Practical examples

Bloom's cognitive learning taxonomy is widely used in medical education. The revised taxonomy published by David Kathwohl (1956) and his group describes the levels in action forms: Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Innovate. The taxonomy has been commonly used to design and structure educational goals and objectives. However, most uses occur at the course or program curriculum level, as was originally described. Whereas applying the taxonomy at the level of individual educational activities remained limited for different reasons. Hence, the aim of this article is to promote applying the taxonomy in daily clinical teaching by providing practical clinical examples in a simplified way.

•

Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning is widely used in medical education to design educational curricula.

•

The taxonomy can be efficiently used in daily educational clinical activities.

•

Clinician educators are encouraged to apply the taxonomy at clinical encounters.

•

Understanding the taxonomy through clinical examples can enhance the application of the taxonomy.

Entrustable Professional Activities in Orthopaedics

Background

An entrustable professional activity (EPA) is defined as a core task of a specialty that is entrusted to a trainee once sufficient competence has been reached. A group of EPAs reflects the activities that clinicians commonly do on a day-to-day basis. Lists of EPAs have been created for most medical subspecialties, but not orthopaedic surgery. The aim of this study was to create a peer-reviewed list of essential EPAs that a resident must perform independently before completing orthopaedic residency training.

Methods

A focus group of 7 orthopaedic surgeons from the University of Toronto developed a comprehensive list of 285 EPAs. For each subspecialty group, the opinions of at least 15 academic and nonacademic surgeons, as well as subspecialty-trained and non-subspecialty-trained surgeons, were used. The modified Delphi method was used to rank EPAs on a five-point scale from not important to mandatory for a resident to competent before exiting training. Two Delphi rounds were used, using a threshold of >50% of surgeons considering the EPA as mandatory before being considered for the next round. A final list of EPAs was ratified using the focus group of academic surgeons involved in the study.

Results

Seventy-five (75) of 107 (70%) surgeons invited responded to the survey. Nearly half (129) of the 285 EPAs were discarded after the first round of Delphi. A further 118 EPAs were discarded after the second Delphi round, leaving 49 final EPAs, across 9 subspecialties in orthopaedic surgery.

Conclusions

Expert consensus was used to create a list of EPAs considered mandatory for completion of resident training in orthopaedics in our province. The final 49 peer-reviewed EPAs will be a valuable benchmark in curriculum design and assessment in orthopaedic surgery in the competency-based era for other programs.

Open Notes in Teaching Clinics: A Multisite Survey of Residents to Identify Anticipated Attitudes and Guidance for Programs

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are increasingly sharing outpatient visit notes with patients through electronic portals. These open notes may bring about new educational opportunities as well as concerns to physicians-in-training and residency programs.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed anticipatory attitudes about open notes and explored factors influencing residents' propensity toward note transparency.

METHODS

Residents in primary care clinics at 4 teaching hospitals were surveyed prior to implementation of open notes. Main measures included resident attitudes toward open notes and the anticipated effect on patients, resident workload, and education. Data were stratified by site.

RESULTS

A total of 176 of 418 (42%) residents responded. Most residents indicated open notes would improve patient engagement, trust, and education but worried about overwhelming patients, residents being less candid, and workload. More than half of residents thought open notes were a good idea, and 32% (56 of 176) indicated they would encourage patients to read these notes. More than half wanted note-writing education and more feedback, and 72% (126 of 175) indicated patient feedback on residents' notes could improve communication skills. Attitudes about effects of open notes on safety, quality, trust, and medical education varied by site.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents reported mixed feelings about the anticipated effects of sharing clinical notes with patients. They advocate for patient feedback on notes, yet worry about workload, supervision, and errors. Training site was correlated with many attitudes, suggesting local culture drives resident support for open notes. Strategies that address resident concerns and promote teaching and feedback related to notes may be helpful.