Midclerkship Feedback Quality Improvement via Introduction of Simple Form (P3-2.004)

Abstract

<h3>Objective:</h3> The provision of formative midpoint feedback in clerkships is required under Accreditation Standard 9.7 of the Liaison Committe on Medical Education (LCME). Our institution uses an end of clerkship evaluation by the medical students to evaluate education program quality (LCME Standard 8.5). The Clerkship Director aimed to improve the perceived quality of mid-clerkship feedback by introducing a form to prompt students to undergo specific discussion of strengths and weaknesses at the end of the first week of the clerkship. <h3>Background:</h3> The Neurology Clerkship at New York Medical College is a four-week required third year medical school clerkship with 4 clinical sites. The largest clinical site is Westchester Medical Center (WMC) with typical enrollment of 10 students per month. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> Students scored the quality of mid-clerkship feedback on a Likert scale from 1–5, with 5 being best, during their end of clerkship evaluation. Starting in Block 8 (February 2022), a mid-clerkship preparation form was given to students which asked students to solicit individualized feedback from their resident and attending physician preceptors. Students were prompted to list two strengths and two areas to work on. They brought the paper to the formal mid-clerkship feedback session with the Site Director during week 2. <h3>Results:</h3> The average score on the Likert scale for mid-clerkship feedback quality was 3.58 in the 3 blocks preceding the change and 3.71 in the 3 blocks following the change. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> Structured interview tools can improve mid-clerkship feedback experience. <b>Disclosure:</b> Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Acorda, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Abbvie. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Teva Neuroscience, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Acadia Pharmaceutical, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Kyowa Kirin, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Adamas Pharmaceutical, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Acorda Therapeutics, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Sunovion, Inc.. Dr. Fekete has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for Medlink, Inc.. The institution of Dr. Fekete has received research support from Lundbeck. Dr. Fekete has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Fekete has a non-compensated relationship as a Neurological Working Group Member with Alliance for Patient Access that is relevant to AAN interests or activities.