Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison
Background: Simulation-based assessment can complement workplace-based assessment of rare or difficult to assess Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). We aimed to compare the use of simulation-based assessment for resuscitation-focused EPAs in three postgraduate medical training programs and...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Canadian Medical Education Journal
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Canadian Medical Education Journal |
| Online Access: | http://localhost:8040/ojs/index.php/cmej/article/view/73692 |
| _version_ | 1797867945646358528 |
|---|---|
| author | Jeremy D Seed Stephen Gauthier Boris Zevin Andrew K Hall Timothy Chaplin |
| author_facet | Jeremy D Seed Stephen Gauthier Boris Zevin Andrew K Hall Timothy Chaplin |
| author_sort | Jeremy D Seed |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Background: Simulation-based assessment can complement workplace-based assessment of rare or difficult to assess Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). We aimed to compare the use of simulation-based assessment for resuscitation-focused EPAs in three postgraduate medical training programs and describe faculty perceptions of simulation-based assessment.
Methods: EPA assessment scores and setting (simulation or workplace) were extracted from 2017-2020 for internal medicine, emergency medicine, and surgical foundations residents at the transition to discipline and foundations of discipline stages. A questionnaire was distributed to clinical competency committee members.
Results: Eleven percent of EPA assessments were simulation-based. The proportion of simulation-based assessment did not differ between programs but differed between transition (38%) and foundations (4%) stages within surgical foundations only. Entrustment scores differed between settings in emergency medicine at the transition level only (simulation: 4.82 ± 0.60 workplace: 3.74 ± 0.93). 70% of committee members (n=20) completed the questionnaire. Of those that use simulation-based assessment, 45% interpret them differently than workplace-based assessments. 73% and 100% trust simulation for high-stakes and low-stakes assessment, respectively.
Conclusions: The proportion of simulation-based assessment for resuscitation focused EPAs did not differ between three postgraduate medical training programs. Interpretation of simulation-based assessment data between committee members was inconsistent. All respondents trust simulation-based assessment for low-stakes, and the majority for high-stakes assessment. These findings have practical implications for the integration simulation into programs of assessment.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T23:49:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-87557a12975949cfababe73702fa0ec3 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1923-1202 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T23:49:17Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | Canadian Medical Education Journal |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Canadian Medical Education Journal |
| spelling | doaj.art-87557a12975949cfababe73702fa0ec32023-03-17T17:49:40ZengCanadian Medical Education JournalCanadian Medical Education Journal1923-12022023-02-0110.36834/cmej.73692Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparisonJeremy D Seed0Stephen Gauthier1Boris Zevin2Andrew K Hall3Timothy Chaplin4Queen's UniversityQueen's UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of OttawaQueen's University Background: Simulation-based assessment can complement workplace-based assessment of rare or difficult to assess Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). We aimed to compare the use of simulation-based assessment for resuscitation-focused EPAs in three postgraduate medical training programs and describe faculty perceptions of simulation-based assessment. Methods: EPA assessment scores and setting (simulation or workplace) were extracted from 2017-2020 for internal medicine, emergency medicine, and surgical foundations residents at the transition to discipline and foundations of discipline stages. A questionnaire was distributed to clinical competency committee members. Results: Eleven percent of EPA assessments were simulation-based. The proportion of simulation-based assessment did not differ between programs but differed between transition (38%) and foundations (4%) stages within surgical foundations only. Entrustment scores differed between settings in emergency medicine at the transition level only (simulation: 4.82 ± 0.60 workplace: 3.74 ± 0.93). 70% of committee members (n=20) completed the questionnaire. Of those that use simulation-based assessment, 45% interpret them differently than workplace-based assessments. 73% and 100% trust simulation for high-stakes and low-stakes assessment, respectively. Conclusions: The proportion of simulation-based assessment for resuscitation focused EPAs did not differ between three postgraduate medical training programs. Interpretation of simulation-based assessment data between committee members was inconsistent. All respondents trust simulation-based assessment for low-stakes, and the majority for high-stakes assessment. These findings have practical implications for the integration simulation into programs of assessment. http://localhost:8040/ojs/index.php/cmej/article/view/73692 |
| spellingShingle | Jeremy D Seed Stephen Gauthier Boris Zevin Andrew K Hall Timothy Chaplin Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison Canadian Medical Education Journal |
| title | Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| title_full | Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| title_fullStr | Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| title_full_unstemmed | Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| title_short | Simulation vs workplace-based assessment in resuscitation: a cross-specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| title_sort | simulation vs workplace based assessment in resuscitation a cross specialty descriptive analysis and comparison |
| url | http://localhost:8040/ojs/index.php/cmej/article/view/73692 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jeremydseed simulationvsworkplacebasedassessmentinresuscitationacrossspecialtydescriptiveanalysisandcomparison AT stephengauthier simulationvsworkplacebasedassessmentinresuscitationacrossspecialtydescriptiveanalysisandcomparison AT boriszevin simulationvsworkplacebasedassessmentinresuscitationacrossspecialtydescriptiveanalysisandcomparison AT andrewkhall simulationvsworkplacebasedassessmentinresuscitationacrossspecialtydescriptiveanalysisandcomparison AT timothychaplin simulationvsworkplacebasedassessmentinresuscitationacrossspecialtydescriptiveanalysisandcomparison |