Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/40480
Title: | Perceptions of purpose, value, and process of the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise in anesthesia training. | Authors: | Weller J.M.;Castanelli D.J. ;Chen Y.;Jowsey T. | Monash Health Department(s): | Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine | Institution: | (Castanelli) Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3168, Australia (Castanelli) Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Jowsey, Chen, Weller) Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand (Weller) Department of Anaesthesia, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand | Issue Date: | 29-Mar-2017 | Copyright year: | 2016 | Publisher: | Springer New York LLC (E-mail: barbara.b.bertram@gsk.com) | Place of publication: | United States | Publication information: | Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 63 (12) (pp 1345-1356), 2016. Date of Publication: 01 Dec 2016. | Journal: | Canadian Journal of Anesthesia | Abstract: | Introduction: Workplace-based assessment is integral to programmatic assessment in a competency-based curriculum. In 2013, one such assessment, a mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (mini-CEX) with a novel "entrustability scale", became compulsory for over 1,200 Australia and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) trainees. We explored trainees' and supervisors' understanding of the mini-CEX, their experience with the assessment, and their perceptions of its influence on learning and supervision. Method(s): We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with anesthesia supervisors and trainees and performed an inductive thematic analysis of the verbatim transcripts. Result(s): Eighteen supervisors and 17 trainees participated (n = 35). Interrelated themes concerned the perceived purpose of the mini-CEX, its value in trainee learning and supervision, and the process of performing the assessment. While few participants saw the mini-CEX primarily as an administrative burden, most focused on its potential for facilitating trainee improvement and reported positive impacts on the quantity and quality of feedback, trainee learning, and supervision. Finding time to schedule assessments and deliver timely feedback proved to be difficult in busy clinical workplaces. Views on case selection were divided and driven by contrasting goals - i.e., receiving useful feedback on challenging cases or receiving a high score by choosing lenient assessors or easy cases. Whether individual mini-CEXs were summative or formative was subject to intense debate, while the intended summative use of multiple mini-CEXs in programmatic assessment was poorly understood. Conclusion(s): Greater clarity of purpose and consistency of time commitment are necessary to embed the mini-CEX in the culture of the workplace, to realize the full potential for trainee learning, and to reach decisions on trainee progression.Copyright © 2016, Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society. | DOI: | http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-016-0740-9 | ORCID: | Castanelli, Damian J.; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5377-809X | PubMed URL: | 27663452 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=27663452] | ISSN: | 0832-610X | URI: | https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/40480 | Type: | Article |
Appears in Collections: | Articles |
Show full item record
Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.