Comparing Faculty and Trainee Evaluators of First-Year Resident Skills

Abstract

To determine if senior residents are comparable to faculty in assessing first-year resident skills on their overall assessment. As resident training moves towards a competency-based model, innovative approaches to evaluation and feedback through simulation need to be developed for both procedural as well as interpersonal and communication skills. In most areas of simulation, the faculty assess resident performance however; in clinical practice, first-year residents are often overseen and taught by senior residents. We aim to explore the agreement between faculty and senior resident assessors to determine if senior residents can be incorporated into a competency-based curriculum as appropriate evaluators of first-year resident skills. Annual surgical first year resident training for central line placement, obtaining informed consent and breaking bad news at a single institution is assessed through an overall assessment (OA). In previous years, only faculty have been the evaluators for the OA. In this study, select senior residents were asked to participate as evaluators and agreement between groups of evaluators was assessed across the 3 tasks taught during surgical first-year resident training. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, tertiary hospital, Simulation Center. Anesthesia and surgery interns, chief residents, anesthesia and surgical faculty. Agreement between faculty and senior resident assessors was strongest for the central line placement simulation with a faculty average competency score of 10.71 and 9.59 from senior residents (κ = 0.43; 95% CI: -0.2, 0.34). Agreement was less substantial for simulated informed consent (κ = 0.08; 95% CI: -0.19, 0.36) and the breaking bad news simulation (κ = 0.07; 95% CI: -0.2, 0.34). Select senior residents are comparable to faculty evaluators for procedural competency; however, there was less agreement between evaluator groups for interpersonal and communication-based competencies.