A Pilot Study of Inpatient Satisfaction Rating of Surgical Resident Care

Inpatient Satisfaction With Surgical Resident Care After Elective General and Oncologic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To investigate inpatient satisfaction with surgical resident care.

BACKGROUND

Surgical trainees are often the primary providers of care to surgical inpatients, yet patient satisfaction with surgical resident care is not well characterized or routinely assessed.

METHODS

English-speaking, general surgery inpatients recovering from elective gastrointestinal and oncologic surgery were invited to complete a survey addressing their satisfaction with surgical resident care. Patients positively identified photos of surgical senior residents and interns before completing a modified version of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surgical Care Survey (S-CAHPS). Adapted S-CAHPS items were scored using the "top-box" method.

RESULTS

Ninety percent of recruited patients agreed to participate (324/359, mean age=62.2, 50.3% male). Patients were able to correctly identify their seniors and interns 85% and 83% of the time, respectively ( P =0.14). On a 10-point scale, seniors had a mean rating of 9.23±1.27 and interns had a mean rating of 9.01±1.49 ( P =0.14). Ninety-nine percent of patients agreed it was important to help in the education of future surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical inpatients were able to recognize their resident physicians with high frequency and rated resident care highly overall, suggesting that they may serve as a willing source of feedback regarding residents' development of core competencies such as interpersonal skills, communication, professionalism, and patient care. Future work should investigate how to best incorporate patient evaluation of surgical resident care routinely into trainee assessment to support resident development.

Patient involvement in assessment of postgraduate medical learners: A scoping review

CONTEXT

Competency-based assessment of learners may benefit from a more holistic, inclusive, approach for determining readiness for unsupervised practice. However, despite movements towards greater patient partnership in health care generally, inclusion of patients in postgraduate medical learners' assessment is largely absent.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to map the nature, extent and range of literature examining the inclusion (or exclusion) of patients within the assessment of postgraduate medical learners. Guided by Arskey and O'Malley's framework and informed by Levac et al. and Thomas et al., we searched two databases (MEDLINE® and Embase®) from inception until February 2021 using subheadings related to assessment, patients and postgraduate learners. Data analysis examined characteristics regarding the nature and factor influencing patient involvement in assessment.

RESULTS

We identified 41 papers spanning four decades. Some literature suggests patients are willing to be engaged in assessment, however choose not to engage when, for example, language barriers may exist. When stratified by specialty or clinical setting, the influence of factors such as gender, race, ethnicity or medical condition seems to remain consistent. Patients may participate in assessment as a stand-alone group or part of a multi-source feedback process. Patients generally provided high ratings but commented on the observed professional behaviours and communication skills in comparison with physicians who focused on medical expertise.

CONCLUSION

Factors that influence patient involvement in assessment are multifactorial including patients' willingness themselves, language and reading-comprehension challenges and available resources for training programmes to facilitate the integration of patient assessments. These barriers however are not insurmountable. While understudied, research examining patient involvement in assessment is increasing; however, our review suggests that the extent which the unique insights will be taken up in postgraduate medical education may be dependent on assessment systems readiness and, in particular, physician readiness to partner with patients in this way.

The Resident-Run Minor Surgery Clinic: A Four-Year Analysis of Patient Outcomes, Satisfaction, and Resident Education

OBJECTIVE

A resident-run minor surgery clinic was developed to increase resident procedural autonomy. We evaluated whether 1) there was a significant difference between complications and patient satisfaction when procedures were independently performed by surgical residents vs. a surgical attending and 2) if participation was associated with an increase in resident procedural confidence.

DESIGN

Third year general surgery residents participated in a weekly procedure clinic from 2014-2018. Post-procedure complications and patient satisfaction were compared between patients operated on by residents vs. the staff surgeon. Residents were surveyed regarding their confidence in independently performing a variety of clinic-based patient care tasks.

SETTING

Massachusetts General Hospital General in Boston, MA; an academic tertiary care general surgery residency program.

PARTICIPANTS

Post-graduate year three general surgery residents that ran the clinic as part of a general surgery rotation.

RESULTS

1230 patients underwent 1592 procedures (612 in resident clinic, 980 in attending clinic). There was no significant difference in the 30-day complication rate between patients operated on by the resident vs. attending (2.5% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.49). 459 patient satisfaction surveys were administered with a 79.1% response rate. There was no significant difference in the overall quality of care rating between residents and the attending surgeon (87.5% top-box rating vs. 93.1%, p = 0.15). Twenty-one residents completed both a pre- and post-rotation survey (77.8% response rate). The proportion of residents indicating that they could independently perform a variety of patient care tasks significantly increased across the rotation (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mid-level general surgery residents can independently perform office-based procedures without detriment to safety or patient satisfaction. The resident-run procedure clinic serves as an environment for residents to grow in confidence in both technical and non-technical skills. Given the high rate at which patients provide resident feedback, future work may investigate how to best incorporate patient derived evaluations into resident assessment.

Communication Skills of Grandview/Southview Medical Center General Surgery Residents

CONTEXT

In the transition of osteopathic programs to the single-accreditation graduate medical education (GME) system, residents are required to demonstrate skill in a set of core competencies identified by the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) prior to graduation. Included in those core competencies are interpersonal and communication skills along with professionalism.

OBJECTIVES

To assess strengths and weaknesses of residents' interpersonal communication skills and professionalism in the Grandview/Southview Medical Center (Dayton, OH) osteopathic general surgery program using the validated Communication Assessment Tool (CAT).

METHODS

From November 2014 to June 2018, all patients who presented for an appointment at the Cassano General Surgery Clinic were asked by a medical assistant to complete a CAT questionnaire following their encounter with a resident physician. Patients at Cassano, an outpatient office-based facility directed to the underserved local community, are seen first by an intern, then by a 4th or 5th year resident and later by an attending physician. Patients 18 years of age or older were included; patients were excluded if they were unable to understand or read English. Patient demographics were collected, including age, gender, race/ethnicity, and previous exposure to this resident physician. Each resident's name was replaced on the CAT with a number for data analysis. The resident variables collected for this study included year of training, gender, and native language.

RESULTS

The mean response for all CAT items was 4.5 out of 5, indicating that responses to resident performance were largely positive. Patients responded to 4 of the 14 CAT items with only excellent, very good, or good responses and no fair or poor responses. Four items had only 1 fair or poor response. The remaining 6 items received more than 1 fair or poor response: "greeted me in a way that made me feel comfortable" (#1), "talked in terms I could understand" (#8), "encouraged me to ask questions" (#10), "involved me in decisions as much as I wanted" (#11), "showed care and concern" (#13), and "spent the right amount of time with me" (#14).

CONCLUSIONS

Attending surgeons evaluate residents in multiple areas from a doctor's perspective, but there is a potential lack of correlation between that evaluation and a patient's experience, which is paramount in osteopathic medicine. Patient responses to the CAT questionnaire can be used by program directors to identify deficiencies in milestone/competency achievement and facilitate improvement both individually and programmatically for residents according to ACGME standards.