Article Text

Clinical instructors' perception of a faculty development programme promoting postgraduate year-1 (PGY1) residents' ACGME six core competencies: a 2-year study
  1. Fa-Yauh Lee1,
  2. Ying-Ying Yang2,3,
  3. Hui-Chi Hsu2,3,
  4. Chiao-Lin Chuang2,
  5. Wei-Shin Lee2,
  6. Ching-Chih Chang2,
  7. Chia-Chang Huang4,
  8. Jaw-Wen Chen4,
  9. Hao-Min Cheng4,
  10. Tjin-Shing Jap1
  1. 1Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
  2. 2Division of General Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
  3. 3Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan
  4. 4Department of Medical Research and Education, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ying-Ying Yang; yangyy{at}vghtpe.gov.tw

Abstract

Objective The six core competencies designated by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) are essential for establishing a patient centre holistic medical system. The authors developed a faculty programme to promote the postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) resident, ACGME six core competencies. The study aims to assess the clinical instructors' perception, attitudes and subjective impression towards the various sessions of the ‘faculty development programme for teaching ACGME competencies.’

Methods During 2009 and 2010, 134 clinical instructors participated in the programme to establish their ability to teach and assess PGY1 residents about ACGME competencies.

Results The participants in the faculty development programme reported that the skills most often used while teaching were learnt during circuit and itinerant bedside, physical examination teaching, mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) evaluation demonstration, training workshop and videotapes of ‘how to teach ACGME competencies.’ Participants reported that circuit bedside teaching and mini-CEX evaluation demonstrations helped them in the interpersonal and communication skills domain, and that the itinerant teaching demonstrations helped them in the professionalism domain, while physical examination teaching and mini-CEX evaluation demonstrations helped them in the patients' care domain. Both the training workshop and videotape session increase familiarity with teaching and assessing skills. Participants who applied the skills learnt from the faculty development programme the most in their teaching and assessment came from internal medicine departments, were young attending physician and had experience as PGY1 clinical instructors.

Conclusions According to the clinical instructors' response, our faculty development programme effectively increased their familiarity with various teaching and assessment skills needed to teach PGY1 residents and ACGME competencies, and these clinical instructors also then subsequently apply these skills.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Supplementary materials

  • Supplementary Data

    This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Footnotes

  • To cite: Lee F-Y, Yang Y-Y, Hsu H-C, et al. Clinical instructors' perception of a faculty development programme promoting postgraduate year-1 (PGY1) residents' ACGME six core competencies: a 2-year study. BMJ Open 2011;1:e000200. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000200

  • Funding This work was supported by grant no VGH100C-21 from the Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Ethics Committee of Taipei Veteran General Hospital.

  • Contributors All authors actively participated in the analysis, writing and revision of the paper. YYY, FYL and HCH were responsible for study design. YYY, FYL, HCH, JWC, WSL and CCH participated in the questionnaires. CCC, HMC and CCH participated in the creation and management of the database. YYY, FYL, HCH and CCH were responsible for the statistical analysis and writing of the manuscript.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement No additional data available.