Perspectives

Hospitalist Readiness to Assess and Evaluate Resident Progress

Authors: Doris Lin, MD, MS

Abstract

The United States has more than 60,000 practicing hospitalists. As a result of the expansion of this field, hospitalists comprise a large number of physicians who attend on inpatient services with Internal Medicine (IM) residents and are therefore tasked with the important responsibility of assessing and evaluating these learners. The relevant literature focuses primarily on the quality of supervision, fostering autonomy, evaluation, and feedback delivery, as well as factors and perceptions that affect these domains. Faculty development centered on specific methods and practices to improve in these areas is lacking. In this Perspective, I reflect on my own strengths and weaknesses and consider whether I was ever adequately prepared to take on these responsibilities. The Perspective also explores the persistent challenges and provides strategies to help hospitalists assess and evaluate trainee progress.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first.

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view your purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($15)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Williams MV. Hospitalists and the hospital medicine system of care are good for patient care. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1254–1260.   2. Hauer KE, Wachter RM. Implications of the hospitalist model for medical students’ education. Acad Med 2001;76:324–330.   3. Saint S, Fowler KE, Krein SL, et al. An academic hospitalist model to improve healthcare worker communication and learner education: results from a quasi-experimental study at a Veterans Affairs medical center. JHosp Med 2013;8:702–710.   4. Meltzer D, Manning WG, Morrison J, et al. Effects of a physician experience on costs and outcomes on an academic general medicine service: results of a trial of hospitalists. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:866–874.   5. Lindenauer PK, Rothberg MB, Pekow PS, et al. Outcomes of care by hospitalists, general internists, and family physicians. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2589–2600.   6. ten Cate O. Nuts and bolts of entrustable professional activities. J Grad Med Educ 2013;5:157–158.   7. Caverzagie KJ, Cooney TG, Hemmer PA, et al. The development of entrustable professional activities for internal medicine residency training: a report from the Education Redesign Committee of the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine. Acad Med 2015;90:479–484.   8. Shojania KG, Fletcher KE, Saint S. Graduate medical education and patient safety: a busy—and occasionally hazardous—intersection. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:592–598.   9. Rosenbaum L. Leaping without looking—duty hours, autonomy, and the risks of research and practice. N Engl J Med 2016;374:701–703.   10. Kilminster SM, Jolly BC. Effective supervision in clinical practice settings: a literature review. Med Educ 2000;34:827–840.   11. Kennedy TJ, Lingard L, Baker GR, et al. Clinical oversight: conceptualizing the relationship between supervision and safety. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22:1080–1085.   12. Farnan JM, Petty LA, Georgitis E, et al. A systematic review: the effect of clinical supervision on patient and residency education outcomes. Acad Med 2012;87:428–442.   13. Finn KM, Metlay JP, Chang Y, et al. Effect of increased inpatient attending physician supervision on medical errors, patient safety, and resident education: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2018;178:952–959.   14. Biondi EA, Varade WS, Garfunkel LC, et al. Discordance between resident and faculty perceptions of resident autonomy: can self-determination theory help interpret differences and guide strategies for bridging the divide? Acad Med 2015;90:462–471.   15. Hoffman BD. Using self-determination theory to improve residency training: learning to make omelets without breaking eggs. Acad Med 2015;90:408–410.   16. Mieczkowski AE, Rubio D, Van Deusen R. Perceptions of internal medicinepediatrics residents about autonomy during residency. J Grad Med Educ 2014;6:330–334.   17. Crockett C, Joshi C, Rosenbaum M, et al. Learning to drive: resident physicians’ perceptions of how attending physicians promote and undermine autonomy. BMC Med Educ 2019;19:293.   18. Farnan JM, Johnson JK, Meltzer DO, et al. Strategies for effective on-call supervision for internal medicine residents: the superb/safety model. J Grad Med Educ 2010;2:46–52.   19. ten Cate O, Carraccio C, Damodaran A, et al. Entrustment decision making: extending Miller’s pyramid. Acad Med 2021;96:199–204.   20. Salerno SM, Jackson JL, O’Malley PG. Interactive faculty development seminars improve the quality of written feedback in ambulatory teaching. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18:831–834.   21. Jackson JL, Kay C, Jackson CW, et al. The quality of written feedback by attendings of internal medicine residents. J Gen Intern Med 2015;30:973–978.   22. Tekian A, Park YS, Tilton S, et al. Competencies and feedback on internal medicine residents’ end-of-rotation assessments over time: qualitative and quantitative analyses. Acad Med 2019;94:1961–1969.   23. Hahn B, Waring ED, Chacko J, et al. Assessment of written feedback for emergency medicine residents. South Med J 2020;113:451–456.   24. Marcotte L, Egan R, Soleas E, et al. Assessing the quality of feedback to general internal medicine residents in a competency-based environment. CMEJ 2019;10:e32–e47.   25. Tomiak A, Braund H, Egan R, et al. Exploring how the new entrustable professional activity assessment tools affect the quality of feedback given to medical oncology residents. J Cancer Educ 2020;35:165–177.   26. Berbano EP, Browning R, Pangaro L, et al. The impact of the Stanford Faculty Development Program on ambulatory teaching behavior. J Gen Intern Med 2006;21:430–434.   27. Holmboe ES, Fiebach NH, Galaty LA, et al. Effectiveness of a focused educational intervention on resident evaluations from faculty: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 2001;16:427–434.