Dataset Information

A comparison of orthopaedic surgery and internal medicine perceptions of USMLE Step 1 pass/fail scoring.

ABSTRACT:

Background

United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 will transition from numeric grading to pass/fail, sometime after January 2022. The aim of this study was to compare how program directors in orthopaedics and internal medicine perceive a pass/fail Step 1 will impact the residency application process.

Methods

A 27-item survey was distributed through REDCap to 161 U.S. orthopaedic residency program directors and 548 U.S. internal medicine residency program directors. Program director emails were obtained from the American Medical Association's Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database.

Results

We received 58 (36.0%) orthopaedic and 125 (22.8%) internal medicine program director responses. The majority of both groups disagree with the change to pass/fail, and felt that the decision was not transparent. Both groups believe that the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exam and clerkship grades will take on more importance. Compared to internal medicine PDs, orthopaedic PDs were significantly more likely to emphasize research, letters of recommendation from known faculty, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, audition elective rotations, and personal knowledge of the applicant. Both groups believe that allopathic students from less prestigious medical schools, osteopathic students, and international medical graduates will be disadvantaged. Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors agree that medical schools should adopt a graded pre-clinical curriculum, and that there should be a cap on the number of residency applications a student can submit.

Conclusion

Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors disagree with the change of Step 1 to pass/fail. They also believe that this transition will make the match process more difficult, and disadvantage students from less highly-regarded medical schools. Both groups will rely more heavily on the Step 2 clinical knowledge exam score, but orthopaedics will place more importance on research, letters of recommendation, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, personal knowledge of the applicant, and audition electives.

SUBMITTER: Mun F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8091716 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of a change in preclerkship grading system from Honors/Pass/Fail (H/P/F) to Pass/Fail (P/F) on University of California, San Diego (UCSD) medical students' academic performance. METHODS: Academic performance of students in the classes of 2011 and 2012 (constant-grading classes) were collected and compared with performance of students in the class of 2013 (grading-change class) because the grading policy at UCSD SOM was changed for the class of 2013, from H/P/F during the first year (MS1) to P/F during the second year (MS2). For all students, data consisted of test scores from required preclinical courses from MS1 and MS2 years, and USMLE Step 1 scores. Linear regression analysis controlled for other factors that could be predictive of student performance (i.e., MCAT scores, undergraduate GPA, age, gender, etc.) in order to isolate the effect of the changed grading policy on academic performance. The change in grading policy in the MS2 year only, without any corresponding changes to the medical curriculum, presents a unique natural experiment with which to cleanly evaluate the effect of P/F grading on performance outcomes. RESULTS: After controlling for other factors, the grading policy change to P/F grading in the MS2 year had a negative impact on second-year grades relative to first-year grades (the constant-grading classes performed 1.65% points lower during their MS2 year compared to the MS1 year versus 3.25% points lower for the grading-change class, p?<?0.0001), but had no observable impact on USMLE Step 1 scores. CONCLUSIONS: A change in grading from H/P/F grading to P/F grading was associated with decreased performance on preclinical examinations but no decrease in performance on the USMLE Step 1 examination. These results are discussed in the broader context of the multitude of factors that should be considered in assessing the merits of various grading systems, and ultimately the authors recommend the continuation of pass-fail grading at UCSD School of Medicine.

Project description:BackgroundExamination of arthroscopic skill requires evaluation tools that are valid and reliable with clear criteria for passing. The Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool was developed as a video-based assessment of technical skill with criteria for passing established by a panel of experts. The purpose of this study was to test the validity and reliability of the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool as a pass-fail examination of arthroscopic skill.MethodsTwenty-eight residents and two sports medicine faculty members were recorded performing diagnostic knee arthroscopy on a left and right cadaveric specimen in our arthroscopic skills laboratory. Procedure videos were evaluated with use of the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool by two raters blind to subject identity. Subjects were considered to pass the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool when they attained scores of ≥ 3 on all eight assessment domains.ResultsThe raters agreed on a pass-fail rating for fifty-five of sixty videos rated with an interclass correlation coefficient value of 0.83. Ten of thirty participants were assigned passing scores by both raters for both diagnostic arthroscopies performed in the laboratory. Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that logging more than eighty arthroscopic cases or performing more than thirty-five arthroscopic knee cases was predictive of attaining a passing Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool score on both procedures performed in the laboratory.ConclusionsThe Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool is valid and reliable as a pass-fail examination of diagnostic arthroscopy of the knee in the simulation laboratory.Clinical relevanceThis study demonstrates that the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool may be a useful tool for pass-fail examination of diagnostic arthroscopy of the knee in the simulation laboratory. Further study is necessary to determine whether the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool can be used for the assessment of multiple arthroscopic procedures and whether it can be used to evaluate arthroscopic procedures performed in the operating room.

Project description:PurposeTo determine patients' baseline understanding of overlapping surgery and to evaluate how education changes the perception of the practice in orthopaedic shoulder pain patients at a single institution.MethodsAll patients who visit the clinic with a chief complaint of shoulder pain were given a 15-question survey. The initial 15-question survey assessed demographics, pre-existing knowledge on the practice of overlapping surgery, and their perception of it. They immediately read a statement on the practice of overlapping surgery. After reading the statement, patients were re-evaluated on their level of concern.ResultsA total of 100 patients (55 female, 45 male) completed the survey. Mean age was 53.0 (range, 18-85) years. In total, 38 (38%) had no knowledge on the practice of overlapping surgery; 27 (27%) reported their level of concern as a 1, the lowest level of concern. Overall, 84 (84%) patients reported a level of concern of 3 (median) or lower, indicating a low level of concern. A total of 95 (95%) patients reported either a decrease or no change in level of concern after reading an educational statement on overlapping surgery practices, and 60 (60%) believed there would be no impact if an overlapping surgery was performed. If a patient reported a high level of concern, the most common reasons cited were that the attending physician may not be available during the whole case (15%); that a resident, fellow, or physician assistant may jeopardize the patient's care (24%); or that a critical step would be missed (37%).ConclusionsThere is a low level of baseline understanding of overlapping surgery in patients with shoulder pain. An educational component added during patient counseling proved to be effective in decreasing the level of concern. This study suggests that counseling and education on overlapping surgery may change patient perception and opinion of the practice.Clinical relevanceServes as an evaluation of the knowledge of a specific patient population on overlapping surgery and how it changes with counseling and education.

Project description:BackgroundCannabidiol (CBD) is a known pain modulator that is garnering increased attention in the orthopaedic world. There may be a considerable knowledge gap among orthopaedic sports medicine providers and their perception of its therapeutic value.PurposeTo (1) examine the knowledge and beliefs of sports medicine orthopaedic providers with respect to CBD, (2) deliver an educational component, and (3) elucidate potential barriers to its widespread application.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsA 3-component, 25-question online survey was distributed to members of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and the Arthroscopy Association of North America between July and October 2022. The first 20 questions assessed baseline knowledge and opinions regarding CBD, followed by an educational component, and then 5 questions assessing whether the respondents' opinions had changed after learning more about CBD. Responses were compared according to age, practice setting, and state's cannabinoid legalization status using the chi-square test, and changes in opinions from before to after the educational component were compared using the paired t test.ResultsThere were 101 survey responses, for a response rate of approximately 1%. Most respondents believed that there is a role for CBD in postoperative pain management (76%), acute pain and inflammation after an injury (62%), and chronic pain (94%). Most respondents admitted that they were not knowledgeable about the mechanism of action (89%) or their state's laws (66%) concerning CBD. A minority (25%) believed that CBD has psychoactive properties. While most respondents (76%) did not believe that they would be stigmatized if they were to suggest CBD to a patient, only 48% had ever suggested CBD. Notably, 94% of respondents had encountered patients who reported trying CBD to treat pain. After reading the fact sheet, 51% of respondents stated that their opinion on CBD had changed, and 63% felt inclined to investigate the topic further.ConclusionMost survey respondents believed that CBD has a role in postoperative and chronic pain management. Although there was a relative familiarity with CBD, there was a knowledge gap, suggesting that increased attention, education, and research are necessary.

Project description:BackgroundSitting at the bedside may strengthen physician-patient communication and improve patient experience. Yet despite the potential benefits of sitting, hospital physicians, including resident physicians, may not regularly sit down while speaking with patients.ObjectiveTo examine the frequency of sitting by internal medicine residents (including first post-graduate year [PGY-1] and supervising [PGY-2/3] residents) during inpatient encounters and to assess the association between patient-reported sitting at the bedside and patients' perceptions of other physician communication behaviors. We also assessed residents' attitudes towards sitting.DesignIn-person survey of patients and email survey of internal medicine residents between August 2019 and January 2020.ParticipantsPatients admitted to general medicine teaching services and internal medicine residents at The Johns Hopkins Hospital.Main measuresPatient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside, patients' perceptions of other communication behaviors (e.g., checking for understanding); residents' attitudes regarding sitting.Key resultsOf 334 eligible patients, 256 (76%) completed a survey. Among these 256 respondents, 198 (77%) and 166 (65%) reported recognizing the PGY-1 and PGY-2/3 on their care team, respectively, for a total of 364 completed surveys. On most surveys (203/364, 56%), patients responded that residents "never" sat. Frequent sitting at the bedside ("every single time" or "most of the time," together 48/364, 13%) was correlated with other positive behaviors, including spending enough time at the bedside, checking for understanding, and not seeming to be in a rush (p < 0.01 for all). Of 151 residents, 77 (51%) completed the resident survey; 28 of the 77 (36%) reported sitting frequently. The most commonly cited barrier to sitting was that chairs were not available (38 respondents, 49%).ConclusionsPatients perceived that residents sit infrequently. However, sitting was associated with other positive communication behaviors; this is compatible with the hypothesis that promoting sitting could improve overall patient perceptions of provider communication.