Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T10:57:10.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dispatches from the front: emergency medicine teachers' perceptions of competency-based education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2015

Glen Bandiera  and
David Lendrum
Glen Bandiera*
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
David Lendrum
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Calgary Regional Health Authority, Calgary, AB
*
Division of Emergency Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Suite 1-008 Shuter Wing, 30 Bond Street, Toronto ON M5B 1W8; bandierag@smh.toronto.on.ca.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objectives:

Controversy exists regarding the applicability of competency-based education during clinical rotations in emergencymedicine (EM). Little has been written about the perceptions of front-line teachers regarding one such competencybased education paradigm, the CanMEDS framework. We undertook to determine 1) what perceptions exist among frontline teachers at two academic health science emergency departments (EDs) regarding the use of the CanMEDS roles to frame what residents should learn on ED rotations and 2) how those same teachers envision practically incorporating the CanMEDS roles into feedback provided to residents.

Methods:

Teachers at two sites volunteered for a semistructured focus group study. Focus groups were moderated by an experienced qualitative researcher, and verbatim transcriptions were coded by two independent reviewers. The codes were merged into final themes. The final focus group was used to further explore issues raised and test assumptions made in the preceding groups.

Results:

In five focus groups involving 21 participants, the Medical Expert and Professional roles were seen as most relevant to an EM rotation, whereas the Health Advocate, Manager, Scholar, and Collaborator roles were least relevant. On further exploration, however, faculty identified highly relevant components of each role that they could envision teaching in an ED. Participants also felt that the framework helped highlight the breadth of physician competencies and provided structure for teaching and feedback.

Conclusions:

EM faculty find the CanMEDS framework helpful for structuring teaching and learning and that many elements of the roles, when defined, are feasible to integrate into a clinical rotation.

Keywords

assessmentcompetency-based educationdaily encounter cardsfaculty developmentmedical education
Type
Education • Enseignement
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , May 2011 , pp. 155 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2011

References

REFERENCES

1.Societal Needs Working Group. Skills for the new millennium. Ann RCPSC 1996;29:206–16.Google Scholar
2.Frank, JR, editor. The CanMEDS 2005 physician competency framework. Better standards. Better physicians. Better care. Ottawa: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2005. Available at: http://www.rcpsc.edu/canmeds/CanMEDS2005/index.php.Google Scholar
3.Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Outcomes Project. Available at: http://www.acgme.org/outcome/comp/compCPRL.asp (accessed March 19, 2009).Google Scholar
4.Standards for the accreditation of residency training programs. Mississauga (ON): The College of Family Physicians of Canada; 2006.Google Scholar
5.Toolbox of Assessment Methods. 2000 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), and American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Version 1.1. Chicago: ACGME; 2000. Available: .Google Scholar
6.Bandiera, G, Frank, J, Sherbino, J. The CanMEDS assessment tools handbook. Ottawa: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2005.Google Scholar
7.Bandiera, GW, Lee, S, Tiberius, R. Effective teaching in the emergency department: how effective teachers get it done. Ann Emerg Med 2005;43:253–61.Google Scholar
8.Thurgur, L, Bandiera, G, Lee, S, et al. What emergency medicine learners wish their teachers knew. Acad Emerg Med 2005;12:856–61.Google Scholar
9.Bandiera, GW, Lendrum, D. Daily encounter cards facilitate competency-based feedback but leniency bias persists. CJEM 2008;10:44–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Tenn-Lyn, N, Bandiera, G, Hodges, B, et al. Factors influencing self-directed objective setting by off-service residents in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 2008;51:504.Google Scholar
11.Strauss, A, Corbin, J. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1998.Google Scholar
12.Silverman, D. Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2006.Google Scholar
13.Leung, WC. Competency based medical training: review. BMJ 2002;325:693–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Harden, RM, Crosby, JR, Davis, MH. AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: part 1—an introduction to outcome-based education. Medical Teacher 1999;21:7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Talbot, M. Monkey see, monkey do: a critique of the competency model in graduate medical education. Med Educ 2004;38:587–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Rees, C. The problem with outcomes-based curricula in medical education: insights from educational theory. Med Educ 2004;38:593–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Davis, DA, Mazmanian, PE, Fordis, M, et al. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence—a systematic review. JAMA 2006;296:1094–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Albert, M, Hodges, B, Regehr, G. Research in medical education: balancing service and science. Adv Health Sci Educ 2007;12:103–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed