Resident Self-assessment and Clinical Competency Committee Evaluations in Family Medicine: A Single-Institution Study

Abstract

Background and Objectives: We sought to describe the process of integrating resident self-assessments into milestone assessments at the University of Texas Medical Branch Family Medicine Residency Program in Galveston, Texas. We compared resident self-assessments across milestones to Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) assessments across terms (fall versus spring) and by postgraduate year (PGY). Methods: In fall 2020, the milestone assessment process was updated to include a resident milestone self-assessment, which was used as the starting point for CCC assessment. We calculated mean and standard deviation of average milestone scores for both self-assessment and CCC for each PGY. We used repeated measure analysis of variance to examine within- and between-subject effects. Results: Self-assessment and CCC assessments were completed for 30 postgraduate trainees for spring 2020 and fall 2021 terms, for a total of 60 self- and 60 CCC assessments. CCC score was similar to self-assessment. There were larger variations in the resident self-assessment scores than CCC scores. Self-assessment scores increased by PGY, but were not different between fall and spring terms. We found a significant three-way interaction of assessors, terms, and PGYs. Conclusions: Resident milestone self-assessment enables residents to participate in the assessment process, and when differences exist between self- and CCC assessments, specific feedback can be given based on individual milestone skills. Our study showed progression between PGY regardless of the assessor, but only CCC assessment showed significant differences between terms.

Stories Are the Heart of Family Medicine

“…At a foundational level, the 7 Cs 15 are reflected in the methods we publish. Longitudinal inquiry 16 demonstrates the value of continuity, data triangulation 17 manifests comprehensiveness, and so on. Just as family physicians recognize the influence of context and community on each patient's outcomes, our research recognizes and respects the contextual and interventional effects of method decisions.…”