scholarly journals Practice-Based Learning and Improvement for Institutions: A Case Report

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan E. Kirk ◽  
R. Edward Howell
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
University Of Virginia ◽  
Review Committee ◽  
New Classification ◽  
Graduate Medical ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Medical Institutions ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
The University

Abstract Background In 2006, the University of Virginia became one of the first academic medical institutions to be placed on probation, after the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Institutional Review Committee implemented a new classification system for institutional reviews. Intervention After University of Virginia reviewed its practices and implemented needed changes, the institution was able to have probation removed and full accreditation restored. Whereas graduate medical education committees and designated institutional officials are required to conduct internal reviews of each ACGME–accredited program midway through its accreditation cycle, no similar requirement exists for institutions. Learning As we designed corrective measures at the University of Virginia, we realized that regularly scheduled audits of the entire institution would have prevented the accumulation of deficiencies. We suggest that institutional internal reviews be implemented to ensure that the ACGME institutional requirements for graduate medical education are met. This process represents practice-based learning and improvement at the institutional level and may prevent other institutions from receiving unfavorable accreditation decisions.

scholarly journals The ecology of program director leadership: power relationships and characteristics of effective program directors

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bharat Kumar ◽  
Melissa L. Swee ◽  
Manish Suneja
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Power Relationships ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Power Bases ◽  
Power Structures ◽  
Graduate Medical ◽  
Medical Environment ◽  
Academic Medical

Abstract Background Program directors are often perceived as strong and independent leaders within the academic medical environment. However, they are not as omnipotent as they initially appear. Indeed, PDs are beholden to a variety of different agents, including trainees (current residents, residency applicants, residency alumni), internal influencers (departmental faculty, hospital administration, institutional graduate medical education), and external influencers (the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), medical education community, and society-at-large). Altogether, these agents form a complex ecosystem whose dynamics and relationships shape the effectiveness of program directors. Main body This perspective uses management theory to examine the characteristics of effective PD leadership. We underline the importance of authority, accessibility, adaptability, authenticity, accountability, and autonomy as core features of successful program directors. Additionally, we review how program directors can use the six power bases (legitimacy, referent, informational, expert, reward, and coercive) to achieve positive and constructive change within the complexity of the academic medical ecosystem. Lastly, we describe how local and national institutions can better structure power relationships within the ecosystem so that PD leadership can be most effective. Conclusion Keen leadership skills are required by program directors to face a variety of challenges within their educational environments. Understanding power structures and relationships may aid program directors to exercise leadership judiciously towards fulfilling the educational missions of their departments.

scholarly journals The Canada-Guyana medical education partnership: using videoconferencing to supplement post-graduate medical education among internal medicine trainees

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e18-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Stokes ◽  
Shannon Ruzycki ◽  
Ramdeo Jainarine ◽  
Debra Isaac ◽  
Joanna Cole
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
Medical Residents ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Post Graduate ◽  
Graduate Medical ◽  
Medical Education Program ◽  
Similar Survey ◽  
The University

Background: A Guyana-based, internal medicine (IM) post-graduate medical education program was established in 2013. However, lack of formal teaching sessions are barriers to the program’s success.Objective: To describe the partnership between the University of Calgary and the University of Guyana’s internal medicine residency programs (IMRP). This partnership was created to support the Guyana’s IM academic half-day and is characterized by mutually beneficial, resident-led videoconference teaching sessions.Methods: Calgary medical residents volunteered to create and present weekly teaching presentations to Guyanese residents via videoconference. Questionnaires were completed by Guyanese residents and provided to Calgary residents as feedback on their teaching and presentation skills. A similar survey was completed by Calgary residents.Lessons learned: Twenty-four videoconference teaching sessions were conducted over eight months with a total of 191 and 16 surveys completed by Guyana and Calgary residents, respectively. Over 92% of both Guyana and Calgary residents agreed that the sessions enhanced their learning and over 93% reported increased interest in becoming more involved in international collaborations. 88% of Calgary residents felt the sessions improved their teaching skills.Conclusion: The formation of a resident-led, videoconference teaching series is a mutually beneficial partnership for Canadian and Guyanese medical residents and fosters international collaboration in medical education. 

scholarly journals Internal Reviews Benefit Programs of the Review Team Members and the Program Under Review

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 604-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn M. Andolsek ◽  
Alisa Nagler ◽  
Leslie Dodd ◽  
John L. Weinerth
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Review Committee ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Internal Review ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Review Team ◽  
Duke University ◽  
Program Information

Abstract Background The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates that sponsoring institutions conduct internal reviews. In 1998, the ACGME Institutional Review Committee gave Duke University Hospital a citation for an inadequate internal review (IR) process. Since then, we have instituted several iterative changes. We describe the evolution of Duke University Hospital's current internal review process. Intervention We implemented a new review team composition, template report, use of the program information form, and centralization of documentation to improve our internal review process. In 2007, a more formal evaluation of the outcome and impact of these changes was instituted. This included a yearly survey of all participants and review team members, a review of programs, and a tracking process for the decisions of our Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) on the status of reviewed programs. Results Participants from both the program under review and the review team evaluated the process favorably. Review teams reported they learned from the best practices of the program being reviewed. Program directors from the reviewed programs reported the process improved their documentation. Both groups reported the process better prepared them for their next ACGME Review Committee site visit. The GMEC has recommended “probationary sponsorship” for fewer programs since the IR process changes have been implemented. The IR process was recognized as a best practice in Duke University Hospital's 2004 ACGME institutional review. Conclusion We believe our IR process, review-team composition, template report, program information form, and centralized documentation now fully meets accreditation standards. Participants are reasonably satisfied and report value from the process. More programs are judged to be within substantial compliance by the GMEC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document