Resident feedback and evaluation rates from the faculty members can be improved through various interventions
Authors: Prado, D; Bhargava, A; Kansagra, K; Kumta, J; Narang, S
Title: Feedback and Evaluation of the Trainees by the Trainers (FETT): a QI Project
Author(s): Prado, D; Bhargava, A; Kansagra, K; Kumta, J; Narang, S
Background/Aim: Residency programs across the country are evaluated annually via the ACGME surveys. The programs prioritize areas to improve upon based on the results of the surveys. Rutgers Health/Newark Beth Israel Medical Center Pediatrics Program found itself scoring lower than desired in Program Compliance (%PC) pertaining to residents being “Satisfied with faculty members’ feedback” in the ACGME survey AY19-20 with a score of 44 %PC (compared to a Specialty Compliance of 71%). We hypothesized that by having a structure to the feedback and evaluation process, we can improve our resident satisfaction rates with respect to feedback from faculty.
Objective: We formulated the Feedback and Evaluation of the Trainees by the Trainers (FETT) QI Project with our aim to increase the percentage of residents who are satisfied with faculty feedback as noted on the ACGME survey from 44% to 80% by March 2022.
Methods: We collected baseline data (BL) for overall resident satisfaction, percentage and timely completion of evaluations. We implemented various strategies such as assigning rotation leaders to complete residents’ evaluation each block, making faculty feedback mandatory to the residents, tracking feedback and evaluation forms closely and hosting faculty development program on how to provide feedback and complete evaluations. We also followed up with each resident after the end of the block to assess their experience with respect to feedback. To measure the impact of the interventions, we tracked completed evaluations over a period of four 4-week block schedule from October 2020 to February 2021 and conducted an in-house anonymous survey from residents after completion of the fourth block, with an 82% response rate.
Results: Of the residents who responded to the survey, 85% reported that they received consistent feedback in each rotation, 80% claimed satisfaction (25% BL) and 93% of the evaluations were completed (45% BL). However, only 24% of evaluations were completed on time (3.6% BL). When asked if residents would seek feedback from faculty when not given one, 67% answered “No”.
Conclusion: These results show that while a structured process for improving feedback and evaluation improved our satisfaction rates and likely helped improve the feedback culture, we need to continue to empower residents to actively seek feedback when not given one. We will continue to ameliorate our faculty evaluations completed on time. We would also need to continue to foster the importance of feedback and evaluation from faculty to the residents as it is essential to their professional growth.