Dataset Information

Meeting Resident Scholarly Activity Requirements Through a Longitudinal Quality Improvement Curriculum.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Quality improvement (QI) skills are learned during residency, yet there are few reports of the scholarly activity outcomes of a QI curriculum in a primary care program.

Intervention

We examined whether scholarly activity can result from a longitudinal, experiential QI curriculum that involves residents, clinic staff, and faculty.

Methods

The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Shadyside Family Medicine Residency implemented a required longitudinal outpatient practice improvement rotation (LOPIR) curriculum in 2005. The rotation format includes weekly multidisciplinary work group meetings alternating with resident presentations delivered to the entire program. Residents present the results of a literature review and provide 2 interim project updates to the residency. A completed individual project is required for residency graduation, with project results presented at Residency Research Day. Scholarly activity outcomes of the curriculum were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

As of 2014, 60 residents completed 3 years of the LOPIR curriculum. All residents satisfied the 2014 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) scholarly activity and QI requirements with a literature review presentation in postgraduate year 2, and the presentation of a completed QI project at Residency Research Day. Residents have delivered 83 local presentations, 13 state/regional presentations, and 2 national presentations. Residents received 7 awards for QI posters, as well as 3 grants totaling $21,639. The educational program required no additional curriculum time, few resources, and was acceptable to residents, faculty, and staff.

Conclusions

LOPIR is an effective way to meet and exceed the 2014 ACGME scholarly activity requirements for family medicine residents.

SUBMITTER: Simasek M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4507935 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Ensuring high-quality scholarly output by graduate medical trainees can be a challenge. Within many specialties, including emergency medicine (EM), it is unclear what constitutes appropriate resident scholarly activity. We hypothesized that the quantity and quality of scholarly activity would improve with a clearer guideline, including a point system for eligible scholarly activities. Methods: A resident Scholarly Activity Guideline was implemented for EM residents in a university setting. The guideline consists of a point system in which point values, ranging from 1-10, are assigned to various types of scholarly activities. Residents must earn at least 10 points and present their work to meet their scholarly graduation requirement. We tracked scholarly activities for graduates from the classes of 2014-2020, with the guideline being implemented for the class of 2016. In a blind analysis, we compared median total points per resident, mean counts of the Boyer model of scholarship components per resident, and mean counts of significant scholarly output per resident before vs after the guideline was implemented. Significant scholarly output was defined as an implemented protocol, a research project with data collection and analysis, a research abstract presentation, or an oral abstract presentation. Results: Among 64 residents analyzed, 48 residents used the guideline. We found that median points per resident increased after the guideline was implemented (median, interquartile range: before 7 [7], after 11 [10, 13], P = 0.002). Post-guideline scholarly activities were found to represent more of Boyer's components of scholarship [mean before 0.81 [SD 0.40], mean after 1.52 [SD 0.71], mean difference 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.332 ± 1.09, P < 0.001. There was no difference in the mean significant scholarly output per resident (mean before 1.38 [SD 1.02], mean after 1.02 [SD 1.00], mean difference 0.35, 95% CI 0.93 ± 0.23, P = 0.23). Conclusion: Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline point system significantly increased the quantity and, by one of two measures, increased the quality of scholarly output in our program. Our point-based guideline successfully incorporated traditional and modern forms of scholarship that can be tailored to resident interests.