Faculty Bibliography

AIM: To assess first-year gastroenterology fellows' ability to address difficult interpersonal situations in the workplace using objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE). METHODS: Two OSCEs ("distracted care team" and "frazzled intern") were created to assess response to disruptive behavior. In case 1, a fellow used a colonoscopy simulator while interacting with a standardized patient (SP), nurse, and attending physician all played by actors. The nurse and attending were instructed to display specific disruptive behavior and disregard the fellow unless requested to stop the disruptive behavior and focus on the patient and procedure. In case 2, the fellow was to calm an intern managing a patient with massive gastrointestinal bleeding. The objective in both scenarios was to assess the fellows' ability to perform their duties while managing the disruptive behavior displayed by the actor. The SPs used checklists to rate fellows' performances. The fellows completed a self-assessment survey. RESULTS: Twelve fellows from four gastrointestinal fellowship training programs participated in the OSCE. In the "distracted care team" case, one-third of the fellows interrupted the conflict and refocused attention to the patient. Half of the fellows were able to display professionalism despite the heated discussion nearby. Fellows scored lowest in the interprofessionalism portion of post-OSCE surveys, measuring their ability to handle the conflict. In the "frazzled intern" case, 68% of fellows were able to establish a calm and professional relationship with the SP. Despite this success, only half of the fellows were successfully communicate a plan to the SP and only a third scored "well done" in a domain that focused on allowing the intern to think through the case with the fellow's guidance. CONCLUSION: Fellows must receive training on how to approach disruptive behavior. OSCEs are a tool that can assess fellow skills and set a culture for open discussion.

BACKGROUND:The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has described 6 core competencies with which trainees should demonstrate proficiency. Using the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), we aimed to assess 4 of these competencies among Pediatric Gastrointestinal (GI) fellows (PGs). METHODS:Eight first-year PGs from 6 medical centers in the New York area participated in a 4-station OSCE with trained standardized patient (SP) actors. The cases included an emergency department (ED) consult, or "ED Consult" for lower gastrointestinal bleeding; "Breaking Bad News" focusing on CF nutritional complications; "Second Opinion" for abdominal pain; "Transition of Care" for inflammatory bowel disease. At each station, attending faculty observed the encounters behind a 1-way mirror. SPs and faculties provided immediate feedback to the examined fellows. Previously validated OSCE checklists were used to assess performance. On completion, fellows attended debriefing sessions and completed surveys about the educational value. RESULTS:Median overall milestone competency scores were 6.9 (PC1), 4.8 (PC2), 5.9 (MK1), 5.7 (MK2), 6.4 (ICS1), 6.9 (Prof1), and 6.7 (Prof3). Overall, fellows score highest (7/9) on the inflammatory bowel disease "Transition of Care" case, found the "Breaking Bad News" Cystic Fibrosis OSCE to be the most challenging, and were most comfortable with the "ED Consult" OSCE, as a commonly encountered scenario. Overall, the fellows rated the educational value of the program highly. CONCLUSIONS:To our knowledge, although the OSCE has been validated in other medical fields, this is the first OSCE program developed for PGs fellows. These OSCEs have included Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies, serving to assess fellows' skills in these areas while exposing them to challenging medical and psychosocial cases that they may not frequently encounter.

BACKGROUND: Experiential learning in medical education, as exemplified by objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), is a well-validated approach for improving trainee performance. Furthermore, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has identified OSCEs as an ideal method for assessing the core competency of interpersonal and communication skills. Here, we describe a novel educational tool, the inflammatory bowel disease OSCE (IBD OSCE), to assess and improve this clinical skill set in Gastroenterology fellows. METHODS: We developed a 4-station IBD OSCE that assessed shared decision making, physician-physician communication, and physician-patient consultative skills specifically related to the care of patients with IBD. Each station was videotaped and observed live by faculty gastroenterologists. Behaviorally anchored checklists were scored independently by a faculty observer and the standardized patient/physician, who both provided feedback to the fellow immediately after each case. Post-OSCE, fellows attended a debriefing session on patient communication and were surveyed to assess their perspective on the examination's educational value. RESULTS: Twelve second-year gastroenterology fellows from 5 fellowship programs participated in the IBD OSCE. Fellows performed well in all measured domains and rated the experience highly for its educational value. Fellows cited IBD as an area of relative deficiency in their education compared with other knowledge areas within gastroenterology. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first OSCE designed specifically for the evaluation of skills as they relate to IBD management. Using OSCEs for IBD education provides an opportunity to robustly assess core competencies and the role of the physician as an educator.

AIM: To assess and teach cultural competency skills at the fellowship training level through the use of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). METHODS: We revised four scenarios to infuse a specific focus on cross-cultural care, and to render them appropriate for gastroenterology fellows. Three are discussed here: (1) Poor Health Literacy; (2) Disclosing/Apologizing for a Complication to a Patient Who Mistrusts the Healthcare System; and (3) Breaking Bad News to a Fatalistic Patient. A fourth case emphasizing shared decision-making will be described elsewhere. Four stations were completed by fellows and observed live by four faculty members, and the fellows' performance was assessed. RESULTS: Eleven fellows from four programs participated in the four OSCE. In the "Poor Health Literacy" case, 18% (2/11) of participants recognized that the standardized patient (SP) had below-basic health literacy. None successfully evaluated the SP's reading skills in a culturally-sensitive manner. In "Disclosing/Apologizing for a Complication", 4/11 (36%) personally apologized for the complication. 1/11 recognized the SP's mistrust of the medical system. With "Breaking Bad News", 27% (3/11) explored the patient's values to identify her fatalistic beliefs. CONCLUSION: OSCEs can be used to assess deficiencies in culturally-competent care at the fellowship level. OSCEs also afford fellowships the opportunity to inform future training curricula.