Clinical Performance Measures Research Articles

What Are the Minimal and Substantial Improvements in the HOOS and KOOS and JR Versions After Total Joint Replacement?

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are a gold standard for measuring therapeutic outcomes in research. Extending their use to inform clinical care decisions, determine the appropriateness of therapeutic choices, and assess healthcare quality is attractive but will require our professional community to establish valid estimates of minimal and substantial clinical improvements. The purposes of this study were (1) to assess the validity of estimates for the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) calculated using distribution- and anchor-based methods by determining whether they exceed the minimal detectable change (MDC) for the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) domains, the HOOS, joint replacement (JR) and the KOOS, JR among patients who underwent THA or TKA; (2) to determine substantial clinical benefit thresholds for the HOOS and KOOS domains, the HOOS, JR, and the KOOS, JR among patients who underwent THA or TKA; and (3) to assess the proportions of patients who underwent THA or TKA who achieved an MCID for the HOOS and KOOS domains, HOOS, JR, and KOOS, JR based on distribution-based and anchor-based methods as well as the percentages of patients who achieved substantial clinical benefit using the anchor-based method. Medicare patients enrolled in our institutional joint replacement registry who subsequently underwent THA (n = 2323) or TKA (n = 2630) between 2007 and 2012 completed HOOS or KOOS preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Short-form joint replacement (JR) versions of each PROM were derived from the full PROMs. Of all eligible patients, 78% (3161 of 4080) of THAs and 74% of TKAs (3815 of 5156) consented to join the registry and completed a baseline survey, 88% (2796 of 3161) of THAs and 85% (3230 of 3815) of TKAs were eligible for followup survey administration, and 83% of THAs (2323 of 2796) and 81% (2630 of 3230) of TKAs returned 2-year surveys. For each HOOS domain, KOOS domain, HOOS, JR, and KOOS, JR, we calculated the calibration variation of the instrument (MDC) with confidence intervals (CIs) reflecting 80% (MDC80), 90% (MDC90), and 95% (MDC95) certainty; we calculated the smallest difference joint health patients might detect (MCID) using distribution- and anchor-based approaches and the difference that can be considered a large improvement in joint health (substantial clinical benefit) using an anchor-based approach. Patients undergoing THA were 57% female with a mean (± SD) age of 73 ± 6 years, whereas patients undergoing TKA were 63% female with a mean age of 74 ± 6 years. Depending on the CI chosen for the MDC, values ranged from 7 to 16 for the HOOS and KOOS domains and the JRs. The MCIDs ranged from 6 to 9 for the distribution-based approach and 7 to 36 for the anchor-based approach. All HOOS and KOOS domains and all JR scores are scores from 0 (worst joint health) to 100 (best joint health). The MCIDs calculated using the distribution-based approach were not valid, because they were lower than the MDC for all HOOS/KOOS domains and both JRs at every confidence level. The anchor-based receiver operating characteristic approach, on the other hand, resulted in MCIDs exceeding MDC80 for seven of eight HOOS/KOOS domains and MDC95 for both JR scores. For all domains and JR versions, substantial clinical benefits ranged from 15 to 36, exceeding MDC95 in all domains and JR scores. Across HOOS and KOOS domains as well as the JR, the proportion of patients undergoing THA who achieved an MCID ranged from 77% to 95% with the distribution-based method and from 67% to 96% using the anchor-based method. The proportion achieving substantial clinical benefit ranged from 67% to 85%. The MDC and MCID differ greatly based on assumptions and methods used. The MCID anchor-based approach had superior construct and face validity compared with the MCID distribution-based approach, which never exceeded even small MDCs. Achieving consensus about standard definitions of meaningful improvement will be necessary to maximize utility of these PROMs to inform clinical care or performance measurement. Level III, diagnostic study.

Invited Commentary

Invited Commentary

Improving the quality of drug court clinical screening: a call for performance measurement policy reform

ABSTRACTDespite the widespread use of the drug court model, standardized performance measures for drug courts are not uniformly utilized, and rarely include process measures. To ensure that drug courts are being implemented in the most effective manner, the use of performance measurement tools should be considered for wide scale adoption. Drug court effectiveness is moderated by participant characteristics, and is most effective for individuals with the highest substance use needs. Therefore, having quality clinical screening processes is crucial to ensuring that drug courts are serving the population for which they are effective. This paper examines clinical screening in drug courts, to answer the following 1) what is the current state of screening, 2) what works, and 3) why measurement matters. It also proposes a clinical screening performance measure to improve fidelity and ensure appropriate participant enrollment. The creation of a performance measure would create opportunities to improve drug court outcomes, and leverage pay-for-performance models.

Safety-net institutions in the US grapple with new cholesterol treatment guidelines: a qualitative analysis from the PHoENIX Network.

BackgroundClinical performance measures, such as for cholesterol control targets, have played an integral role in assessing the value of care and translating evidence into clinical practice. New guidelines often require development of corresponding performance metrics and systems changes that can be especially challenging in safety-net health care institutions. Understanding how public health care institutions respond to changing practice guidelines may be critical to informing how we adopt evolving evidence in clinical settings that care for the most vulnerable populations.MethodsWe conducted six focus groups with representatives of California’s 21 public hospital systems to examine their reactions to the recent 2013 cholesterol treatment guideline.ResultsParticipants reported a sense of confusion and lack of direction in implementing the new guideline. They cited organizational and data infrastructural inadequacies that made implementation of the new guidelines impractical in their clinical settings.ConclusionAdopting new performance measures to align with evolving cholesterol guidelines is a complex process that may work at odds with existing quality improvement priorities. Current efforts to translate evidence into practice may rely too much on performance measures and not enough on building capacity or support for innovative efforts to meet the goals of guidelines.

Clinical Performance Measures for Adults Hospitalized With Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Performance Measures for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

To work toward the goal of building healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke, the American Heart Association (AHA) and American Stroke Association (ASA) have developed a multifaceted strategy for improving the quality of care for stroke. A key feature of this strategy is the development of professional guidelines for evidence-based stroke care. Recommendations are provided for acute management, primary and secondary prevention, rehabilitation, stroke systems of care, and other domains of stroke care.1–4 The strength of the evidence supporting these recommendations is given, according to a specified grading system. For many aspects of care, there is widespread consensus that the intervention is beneficial, usually supported by strong scientific evidence including randomized controlled trials. Professional guidelines improve the delivery of evidence-based care; however, despite these guidelines, gaps between best evidence-based practice and actual practice persist.5 To close these gaps in quality of care, several organizations have developed systems to allow practitioners and healthcare organizations such as hospitals to quantify the quality of their care through performance measures. A performance measure is defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality as a “mechanism for assessing the degree to which a provider competently and safely delivers the appropriate clinical services to the patient within the optimal time period.”6 The AHA and American College of Cardiology Foundation have additionally suggested that performance measures should be based on the highest level of supportive evidence and have the greatest impact on health outcomes.7 Performance measures, in addition to supporting quality improvement activities, are specifically suitable for public reporting, external comparisons, and possibly pay-for-performance programs. As steward of the professional guidelines for stroke care, with a large group of volunteer expert clinicians with expertise in guideline creation and performance measurement, the AHA/ASA is uniquely positioned to develop high-quality …

Correction to: 2016 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation or Atrial Flutter: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures.

In the article by Heidenreich et al, “2016 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation or Atrial Flutter: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures,” which published ahead of print on June 27, 2016, and appeared in the July 2016 issue of the journal ( Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016;9:443–488. DOI: 10.1161/HCQ.0000000000000018), several corrections were needed. 1. In response to new data that resulted in changes in the US Food and Drug Administration labeling regarding the use of one of the Factor Xa inhibitors in patients with end-stage kidney disease or on dialysis,1 the Task Force on Performance Measures has removed 2 quality measures. They appeared in Appendix A and are: They are shown below. 2. On page 444, the Table of Contents entries for “QM-6: Atrial Fibrillation: …

Here Comes Price Transparency.

The public reporting of clinical and operational performance measures is old news for chief nurse executives (CNEs). Since the advent of value-based purchasing and patient experience measures, CNEs have partnered with other executives to ensure organizational readiness and success with the performance measures being publicly shared. In 2018, healthcare organizations face a new wave of public reporting expectations-price. Once again, executives will need to ensure organizational readiness. Chief nurse executives must analyze the impact of this trend on the nursing enterprise and carefully consider how to best prepare for healthcare price transparency.

Use of risk-adjusted CUSUM charts to monitor 30-day mortality in Danish hospitals.

BackgroundMonitoring hospital outcomes and clinical processes as a measure of clinical performance is an integral part of modern health care. The risk-adjusted cumulative sum (CUSUM) chart is a frequently used sequential analysis technique that can be implemented to monitor a wide range of different types of outcomes.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to describe how risk-adjusted CUSUM charts based on population-based nationwide medical registers were used to monitor 30-day mortality in Danish hospitals and to give an example on how alarms of increased hospital mortality from the charts can guide further in-depth analyses.Materials and methodsWe used routinely collected administrative data from the Danish National Patient Registry and the Danish Civil Registration System to create risk-adjusted CUSUM charts. We monitored 30-day mortality after hospital admission with one of 77 selected diagnoses in 24 hospital units in Denmark in 2015. The charts were set to detect a 50% increase in 30-day mortality, and control limits were determined by simulations.ResultsAmong 1,085,576 hospital admissions, 441,352 admissions had one of the 77 selected diagnoses as their primary diagnosis and were included in the risk-adjusted CUSUM charts. The charts yielded a total of eight alarms of increased mortality. The median of the hospitals’ estimated average time to detect a 50% increase in 30-day mortality was 50 days (interquartile interval, 43;54). In the selected example of an alarm, descriptive analyses indicated performance problems with 30-day mortality following hip fracture surgery and diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.ConclusionThe presented implementation of risk-adjusted CUSUM charts can detect significant increases in 30-day mortality within 2 months, on average, in most Danish hospitals. Together with descriptive analyses, it was possible to use an alarm from a risk-adjusted CUSUM chart to identify potential performance problems.

2018 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures.

The American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) performance measurement sets serve as vehicles to accelerate translation of scientific evidence into clinical practice. Measure sets developed by the ACC/AHA are intended to provide practitioners and institutions that deliver cardiovascular services with tools to measure the quality of care provided and identify opportunities for improvement. Writing committees are instructed to consider the methodology of performance measure development1 and to ensure that the measures developed are aligned with ACC/AHA clinical guidelines. The writing committees also are charged with constructing measures that maximally capture important aspects of care quality, including …

A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and clinical quality of care measures for US hospitals: results from an observational study

BackgroundLittle is known about the usefulness of online ratings when searching for a hospital. We therefore assess the association between quantitative and qualitative online ratings for US hospitals and clinical quality of care measures.MethodsFirst, we collected a stratified random sample of 1000 quantitative and qualitative online ratings for hospitals from the website RateMDs. We used an integrated iterative approach to develop a categorization scheme to capture both the topics and sentiment in the narrative comments. Next, we matched the online ratings with hospital-level quality measures published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Regarding nominally scaled measures, we checked for differences in the distribution among the online rating categories. For metrically scaled measures, we applied the Spearman rank coefficient of correlation.ResultsThirteen of the twenty-nine quality of care measures were significantly associated with the quantitative online ratings (Spearman p = ±0.143, p < 0.05 for all). Thereof, eight associations indicated better clinical outcomes for better online ratings. Seven of the twenty-nine clinical measures were significantly associated with the sentiment of patient narratives (p = ±0.114, p < 0.05 for all), whereof four associations indicated worse clinical outcomes in more favorable narrative comments.ConclusionsThere seems to be some association between quantitative online ratings and clinical performance measures. However, the relatively weak strength and inconsistency of the direction of the association as well as the lack of association with several other clinical measures may not enable the drawing of strong conclusions. Narrative comments also seem to have limited potential to reflect the clinical quality of care in its current form. Thus, online ratings are of limited usefulness in guiding patients towards high-performing hospitals from a clinical point of view. Nevertheless, patients might prefer different aspects of care when choosing a hospital.

An Integrated Approach Using Chaotic Map & Sample Value Difference Method for Electrocardiogram Steganography and OFDM Based Secured Patient Information Transmission.

This paper presents a patient's confidential data hiding scheme in electrocardiogram (ECG) signal and its subsequent wireless transmission. Patient's confidential data is embedded in ECG (called stego-ECG) using chaotic map and the sample value difference approach. The sample value difference approach effectually hides the patient's confidential data in ECG sample pairs at the predefined locations. The chaotic map generates these predefined locations through the use of selective control parameters. Subsequently, the wireless transmission of the stego-ECG is analyzed using the Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) system in a Rayleigh fading scenario for telemedicine applications. Evaluation of proposed method on all 48 records of MIT-BIH arrhythmia ECG database demonstrates that the embedding does not alter the diagnostic features of cover ECG. The secret data imperceptibility in stego-ECG is evident through the statistical and clinical performance measures. Statistical measures comprise of Percentage Root-mean-square Difference (PRD), Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR), and Kulback-Leibler Divergence (KL-Div), etc. while clinical metrics includes wavelet Energy Based Diagnostic Distortion (WEDD) and Wavelet based Weighted PRD (WWPRD). The various channel Signal-to-Noise Ratio scenarios are simulated for wireless communication of stego-ECG in OFDM system. The proposed method over all the 48 records of MIT-BIH arrhythmia database resulted in average, PRD=0.26, PSNR=55.49, KL-Div=3.34×10-6, WEDD=0.02, and WWPRD=0.10 with secret data size of 21Kb. Further, a comparative analysis of proposed method and recent existing works was also performed. The results clearly, demonstrated the superiority of proposed method.

Increased Rates of Documented Alcohol Counseling in Primary Care: More Counseling or Just More Documentation?

Clinical performance measures often require documentation of patient counseling by healthcare providers. Little is known about whether such measures encourage delivery of counseling or merely its documentation. To assess changes in provider documentation of alcohol counseling and patient report of receiving alcohol counseling in the Veterans Administration (VA) from 2009 to 2012. Retrospective time-series analysis. A total of 5413 men who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use at an outpatient visit and responded to a confidential mailed survey regarding alcohol counseling from a VA provider in the prior year. Rates of provider documentation of alcohol counseling in the electronic health record and patient report of such counseling on the survey were assessed over 4 fiscal years. Annual rates were calculated overall and with patients categorized into four mutually exclusive groups based on their own reports of alcohol counseling (yes/no) and whether alcohol counseling was documented by a provider (yes/no). Provider documentation of alcohol counseling increased 23.6% (95% CI: 17.0, 30.2), from 59.4% to 83.0%, while patient report of alcohol counseling showed no significant change (4.0%, 95% CI: -2.3, 10.3), increasing from 66.1% to 70.1%. An 18.7% (95% CI: 11.7, 25.7) increase in the proportion of patients who reported counseling that was documented by a provider largely reflected a 14.7% decline (95% CI: 8.5, 20.8) in the proportion of patients who reported alcohol counseling that was not documented by a provider. The proportion of patients who did not report counseling but whose providers documented it did not show a significant change (4.9%, 95%CI: 0.0, 9.9). If patient report is accurate, increased rates of documented alcohol counseling in the VA from 2009 to 2012 predominantly reflected improved documentation of previously undocumented counseling rather than delivery of additional counseling or increased documentation of counseling that did not meaningfully occur.

Mobile Phone-Based Measures of Activity, Step Count, and Gait Speed: Results From a Study of Older Ambulatory Adults in a Naturalistic Setting.

BackgroundCellular mobile telephone technology shows much promise for delivering and evaluating healthcare interventions in cost-effective manners with minimal barriers to access. There is little data demonstrating that these devices can accurately measure clinically important aspects of individual functional status in naturalistic environments outside of the laboratory.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to demonstrate that data derived from ubiquitous mobile phone technology, using algorithms developed and previously validated by our lab in a controlled setting, can be employed to continuously and noninvasively measure aspects of participant (subject) health status including step counts, gait speed, and activity level, in a naturalistic community setting. A second objective was to compare our mobile phone-based data against current standard survey-based gait instruments and clinical physical performance measures in order to determine whether they measured similar or independent constructs.MethodsA total of 43 ambulatory, independently dwelling older adults were recruited from Nebraska Medicine, including 25 (58%, 25/43) healthy control individuals from our Engage Wellness Center and 18 (42%, 18/43) functionally impaired, cognitively intact individuals (who met at least 3 of 5 criteria for frailty) from our ambulatory Geriatrics Clinic. The following previously-validated surveys were obtained on study day 1: (1) Late Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI); (2) Survey of Activities and Fear of Falling in the Elderly (SAFFE); (3) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), short form version 1.0 Physical Function 10a (PROMIS-PF); and (4) PROMIS Global Health, short form version 1.1 (PROMIS-GH). In addition, clinical physical performance measurements of frailty (10 foot Get up and Go, 4 Meter walk, and Figure-of-8 Walk [F8W]) were also obtained. These metrics were compared to our mobile phone-based metrics collected from the participants in the community over a 24-hour period occurring within 1 week of the initial assessment.ResultsWe identified statistically significant differences between functionally intact and frail participants in mobile phone-derived measures of percent activity (P=.002, t test), active versus inactive status (P=.02, t test), average step counts (P<.001, repeated measures analysis of variance [ANOVA]) and gait speed (P<.001, t test). In functionally intact individuals, the above mobile phone metrics assessed aspects of functional status independent (Bland-Altman and correlation analysis) of both survey- and/or performance battery-based functional measures. In contrast, in frail individuals, the above mobile phone metrics correlated with submeasures of both SAFFE and PROMIS-GH.ConclusionsContinuous mobile phone-based measures of participant community activity and mobility strongly differentiate between persons with intact functional status and persons with a frailty phenotype. These measures assess dimensions of functional status independent of those measured using current validated questionnaires and physical performance assessments to identify functional compromise. Mobile phone-based gait measures may provide a more readily accessible and less-time consuming measure of gait, while further providing clinicians with longitudinal gait measures that are currently difficult to obtain.

2017 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures.

The American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) performance measure sets serve as vehicles to accelerate translation of scientific evidence into clinical practice. Measure sets developed by the ACC/AHA are intended to provide practitioners and institutions that deliver

Comparison of alternative performance measures for contraceptive care

Objectives: In November 2016, the National Quality Forum endorsed claims-based clinical performance measures for most or moderately effective contraception and LARC. Complementary performance measures that utilize electronic health record (EHR) data are in development to improve both the numerator and the denominator of women who are not at risk for unintended pregnancy. We compared three versions of the measures: EHR only, hybrid (claims+EHR) and claims only.

Long-Term Performance and User Satisfaction With Implanted Neuroprostheses for Upright Mobility After Paraplegia: 2- to 14-Year Follow-Up

ObjectiveTo quantify the long-term (>2y) effects of lower extremity (LE) neuroprostheses (NPs) for standing, transfers, stepping, and seated stability after spinal cord injury. DesignSingle-subject design case series with participants acting as their own concurrent controls, including retrospective data review. SettingHospital-based clinical biomechanics laboratory with experienced (>20y in the field) research biomedical engineers, a physical therapist, and medical monitoring review. ParticipantsLong-term (6.2±2.7y) at-home users (N=22; 19 men, 3 women) of implanted NPs for trunk and LE function with chronic (14.4±7.1y) spinal cord injury resulting in full or partial paralysis. InterventionsTechnical and clinical performance measurements, along with user satisfaction surveys. Main Outcome MeasuresKnee extension moment, maximum standing time, body weight supported by lower extremities, 3 functional standing tasks, 2 satisfaction surveys, NP usage, and stability of implanted components. ResultsStimulated knee extension strength and functional capabilities were maintained, with 94% of implant recipients reporting being very or moderately satisfied with their system. More than half (60%) of the participants were still using their implanted NPs for exercise and function for >10min/d on nearly half or more of the days monitored; however, maximum standing times and percentage body weight through LEs decreased slightly over the follow-up interval. Stimulus thresholds were uniformly stable. Six-year survival rates for the first-generation implanted pulse generator (IPG) and epimysial electrodes were close to 90%, whereas those for the second-generation IPG along with the intramuscular and nerve cuff electrodes were >98%. ConclusionsObjective and subjective measures of the technical and clinical performances of implanted LE NPs generally remained consistent for 22 participants after an average of 6 years of unsupervised use at home. These findings suggest that implanted LE NPs can provide lasting benefits that recipients value.

Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review.

Patients use online consumer ratings to identify high-performing physicians, but it is unclear if ratings are valid measures of clinical performance. We sought to determine whether online ratings of specialist physicians from 5 platforms predict quality of care, value of care, and peer-assessed physician performance. We conducted an observational study of 78 physicians representing 8 medical and surgical specialties. We assessed the association of consumer ratings with specialty-specific performance scores (metrics including adherence to Choosing Wisely measures, 30-day readmissions, length of stay, and adjusted cost of care), primary care physician peer-review scores, and administrator peer-review scores. Across ratings platforms, multivariable models showed no significant association between mean consumer ratings and specialty-specific performance scores (β-coefficient range, -0.04, 0.04), primary care physician scores (β-coefficient range, -0.01, 0.3), and administrator scores (β-coefficient range, -0.2, 0.1). There was no association between ratings and score subdomains addressing quality or value-based care. Among physicians in the lowest quartile of specialty-specific performance scores, only 5%-32% had consumer ratings in the lowest quartile across platforms. Ratings were consistent across platforms; a physician's score on one platform significantly predicted his/her score on another in 5 of 10 comparisons. Online ratings of specialist physicians do not predict objective measures of quality of care or peer assessment of clinical performance. Scores are consistent across platforms, suggesting that they jointly measure a latent construct that is unrelated to performance. Online consumer ratings should not be used in isolation to select physicians, given their poor association with clinical performance.

Can Electronic Health Records Make Quality Measurement Fast and Easy?

Electronic health records (EHRs) present key opportunities to improve the efficiency of quality reporting. An underappreciated aspect of quality measurement is the amount of effort that goes into acquiring and reporting quality data. From chart abstraction to formatting the data so it can be shared with payers, accreditation agencies, and clinical staff, health systems spend a tremendous amount of funds on tracking and reporting of metrics. Electronic quality measures (eQMs) have the potential to automate much of this data collection and reporting process. By freeing staff who have extensive familiarity with the metrics from time-consuming chart abstraction, these quality experts can partner with clinical staff to improve patient care. See Article by Bravata et al In this issue of Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes , Bravata et al1 developed and evaluated a series eQMs abstracted electronically from the medical record for patients with minor stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). The authors developed 31 eQMs encompassing 15 domains of care for patients with minor stroke and TIA that are aligned with national guidelines,2 clinical performance measures,3 and joint commission metrics.4 They then evaluated the agreement between these eQMs and the same measures abstracted manually in a random sample of 763 patients from 50 Veterans Health Administration hospitals. The authors found that for 16 of the 31 measures, electronic abstraction compared favorably with manual abstraction both for eligibility …

Personality Traits Are Associated with Academic Achievement in Medical School: A Nationally Representative Study.

This nationally representative study sought to identify personality traits that are associated with academic achievement in medical school. Third-year medical students, who completed an initial questionnaire in January 2011, were mailed a second questionnaire several months later during their fourth year. Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and burnout, the authors used multivariate logistic regressions to determine whether Big Five personality traits were associated with receiving honors/highest grade in clinical clerkships, failing a course or rotation, and being selected for the Alpha Omega Alpha or Gold Humanism Honor Society. The adjusted response rates for the two surveys were 61 (n=564/919) and 84% (n=474/564). The personality trait conscientiousness predicted obtaining honors/highest grade in all clinical clerkships. In contrast, students high in neuroticism were less likely to do well in most specialties. Students with higher conscientiousness were more likely to be inducted into the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Society, while students high in openness or agreeableness traits were more likely to be inducted into the Gold Humanism Honor Society. Burnout was not associated with any clinical performance measures. This study suggests the importance of personality traits, particularly conscientiousness, in predicting success during the clinical years of medical school. Medical educators should consider a nuanced examination of personality traits and other non-cognitive factors, particularly for psychiatry.

Mannequin-Based Immersive Simulation Improves Resident Understanding of a Clinical Decision Rule

Objective.Simulation-based medical education may aid to standardize clinical performance measures, though there is little evidence for using an immersive, mannequin-based simulation for knowledge acquisition. We predicted that residents who had participated in an immersive simulation exercise illustrating the use of a clinical decision rule plus routine instructional methods (experimental group) would understand and implement this tool better than interns who participated in an immersive simulation focused on traumatic brain injury with intracranial hypertension plus routine instructional methods (control group 1). We further predicted that interns in the experimental group would understand and implement this tool as well as senior residents with more clinical experience (control group 2). Methods. This was a single center, prospective, simulation-based, randomized controlled trial. Pediatric interns were randomly assigned to clinically integrated teaching, plus a single, immersive simulation and structured debrief aimed at teaching this tool in minor head trauma (intervention), or clinically integrated teaching plus a related simulation on intracranial hypertension. Senior residents were used as an historical control arm and did not participate in a simulated encounter. Results. 20 interns (ten per group) participated in the study. Senior residents (n=40) served as historical comparisons. Interns in the intervention group scored similar to senior residents on a structured clinical observation score (median 64% vs. 57%), and better than interns in the placebo group (median 64% vs. 43%). Conclusions. In this study, a single immersive simulation improved resident learning and application of a clinical prediction rule when compared to standard resident education.