Effectiveness of a Focused Faculty Development Program on the Written Comments Component of Resident Evaluations. (October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Dodds, Robert; Deighton-Collins, Sarah; Flora, Robert; Steinauer, Jody
• Is Part Of: Obstetrics and gynecology. Volume 130(2017)Supplement 1
• Publication Date: 2017-10
• Subjects: Obstetrics -- Periodicals; Gynecology -- Periodicals; 618
• DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000525760.32542.18
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0029-7844

Abstract

Abstract : OBJECTIVE: Evaluate effectiveness of faculty development program combined with focused feedback on quality of written comments in resident evaluations. METHODS: Faculty were educated to improve quality of written comments on resident evaluations. Monthly evaluations concurrently changed, requiring comments before ratings. Quality was determined using validated CCERR (Completed Clinical Evaluation Report Rating) on de-identified evaluations, final scores representing median score from both authors. CCERR scores vary from nine to 45 correlating with quality. Baseline data were abstracted from the last half of 2015. Faculty development seminar took place May 2016. Faculty then received feedback at the monthly faculty meetings as well as individual coaching. After 9 months, a survey of faculty and residents will gauge comfort writing comments. CCERR scores were compared using nonparametric test, P <.05 defining significance. RESULTS: Two hundred five evaluations (50% with written comments) comprised the baseline with 22, 28, 38, 27, 28, 32 and 23 evaluations completed (May through November). The median CCERR score increased from baseline of 10–22.5, 20, 20, 21, 22, 21 and 19 (May through November, P <.0001). CONCLUSION: Previous studies confirm CCERR validity, eight points representing meaningful change. Educational sessions and ongoing feedback individually have been shown to increase scores, but not meaningfully. We achieved meaningful change, but our baseline was lower than previous studies. Ongoing feedback was not effective at generating further improvement. It is not clear if the improvement seen resulted from faculty development or changes in the structure of monthly evaluations requiring comments.