Assessment for learning of paediatric cardiology trainees in 41 centres from 19 European countries.

Abstract

Limited data exist on how trainees in paediatric cardiology are assessed among countries affiliated with the Association of European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology. A structured and approved questionnaire was circulated to educationalists/trainers in 95 Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology training centres. Trainers from 46 centres responded with complete data in 41 centres. Instructional design included bedside teaching (41/41), didactic teaching (38/41), problem-based learning (28/41), cardiac catheterisation calculations (34/41), journal club (31/41), fellows presenting in the multidisciplinary meeting (41/41), fellows reporting on echocardiograms (34/41), clinical simulation (17/41), echocardiography simulation (10/41), and catheterisation simulation (3/41). Assessment included case-based discussion (n = 27), mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) (n = 12), directly observed procedures (n = 12), oral examination (n = 16), long cases (n = 11), written essay questions (n = 6), multiple choice questions (n = 5), and objective structured clinical examination (n = 2). Entrustable professional activities were utilised in 10 (24%) centres. Feedback was summative only in 17/41 (41%) centres, formative only in 12/41 (29%) centres and a combination of formative and summative feedback in 10/41 (24%) centres. Written feedback was provided in 10/41 (24%) centres. Verbal feedback was most common in 37/41 (90 %) centres. There is a marked variation in instructional design and assessment across European paediatric cardiac centres. A wide mix of assessment tools are used. Feedback is provided by the majority of centres, mostly verbal summative feedback. Adopting a programmatic assessment focusing on competency/capability using multiple assessment tools with regular formative multisource feedback may promote assessment for learning of paediatric cardiology trainees.