4.2 Article

A Novel Experiential Quality Improvement Training Program During Residency Improves Quality Improvement Confidence and Knowledge: a Prospective Cohort Study

期刊

ACADEMIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 44, 期 3, 页码 267-271

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40596-020-01184-2

关键词

Curriculum; Quality improvement; QIKAT; Psychiatry residency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates resident quality improvement (QI) training to improve patient safety, cost control, and efficiency. Thus, understanding this topic is crucial for early career physicians. This manuscript describes an enhanced, experiential QI curriculum for psychiatry residents and its outcomes. Methods Two cohorts of 12 third-year residents completed the curriculum, which included didactics, external resources, and expert guidance through small group project design, implementation, and analysis/presentation. A survey on resident confidence in QI principles and the quality improvement knowledge assessment tool-revised (QIKAT-R) was used before and after curriculum participation. Data were analyzed using parametric descriptive tests and repeated measures general linear models with Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons. Results Resident confidence in performing seven of the ten steps of QI and QIKAT-R scores significantly improved for both cohorts (p = .011). Eighty-nine percent of residents felt that the curriculum met their goals. Conclusions The QI curriculum effectively improved resident QI confidence and knowledge. Residents reported that experiential engagement in the design, implementation, and analysis/presentation of their project was crucial to these achievements. This experiential QI curriculum with resident-generated QI projects addressed ACGME training requirements while integrating QI training directly into the residents' clinical activities, making the QI efforts relevant and meaningful while also achieving ACGME goals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据