PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Introduction Academic coaching fosters self-directed learning and is growing in popularity within residency programs. Implementation is often limited by available faculty time and funding. Peer coaching is an emerging alternative but is not well studied. This study aims to demonstrate the acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of a resident peer coaching program. Methodology In the 2021-2022 academic year, within a large pediatric residency program, we selected and trained senior residents as coaches and interns who opted in as coachees. Coaching dyads began meeting in the fall and worked toward individualized goals throughout the year; control interns participated in routine didactics. Outcomes included Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestone scores and a self-assessment survey (SAS). Results We enrolled 15/42 (36%) interns as coachees, with the remaining 27 (64%) as controls. Narrative feedback from coaches and coachees was overall positive, and time commitment was feasible for program staff (10-12 hours/month), coaches (three to four hours/month), and coachees (one to two hours/month) with minimal financial needs. Post-intervention, more coachees than controls scored ≥4.0 on ACGME milestones systems-based practice 3 (SBP3; 3/15, 20%, vs. 2/27, 7%), SBP4 (4/15, 27%, vs. 5/27, 19%), and practice-based learning and improvement 1 (4/15, 27%, vs. 3/27, 11%). SAS response rate was 8/15 (53%) for coachees and 5/27 (19%) for controls. More coachees than controls reported baseline difficulty with time management often (3/8, 38%, vs. 1/5, 20%); only coachees improved post-intervention, with 0/8 (0%) having difficulty often versus 2/5 (40%) of controls. Conclusions Resident peer coaching is acceptable and feasible to implement. Coachees reported more improvement in time management than controls, and ACGME milestone scores suggest improved use of evidence-based medicine and interprofessional care coordination among coachees.
摘要：
学术教练促进自我指导学习，并在居住计划中越来越受欢迎。实施通常受到可用教师时间和资金的限制。同伴教练是一种新兴的选择，但尚未得到很好的研究。本研究旨在证明可接受性，可行性,以及常驻同伴辅导计划的有效性。方法学在2021-2022学年，在一个大型的儿科住院医师计划中，我们选择和培训高级居民作为教练和实习生，他们选择作为教练。教练小组在秋天开始开会，并在全年努力实现个性化目标；控制实习生参加了常规教学。结果包括研究生医学教育认证委员会（ACGME）里程碑得分和自我评估调查（SAS）。结果我们招募了15/42(36%)的实习生作为教练，其余27人(64%)作为对照。教练和教练的叙事反馈总体上是积极的，和时间承诺是可行的方案工作人员（10-12小时/月），教练(三到四个小时/月)，和coachees（一到两个小时/月），财务需求最少。干预后，在基于ACGME里程碑系统的实践3上，得分≥4.0的对照组更多(SBP3；3/15，20%，vs.2/27，7%），SBP4（4/15，27%，vs.5/27，19%），基于实践的学习和改进1(4/15，27%，vs.3/27，11%）。SAS反应率为8/15（53％），对照组为5/27（19％）。比对照组更多的人经常报告基线时间管理困难(3/8，38%，vs.1/5，20%)；只有系数在干预后有所改善，0/8（0％）通常有困难，而对照组为2/5（40％）。结论居民同伴辅导是可以接受的，也是可行的。Coachees报告说，时间管理比控制措施有更多的改进，和ACGME里程碑评分表明,改善了循证医学的使用和职业间护理协调。
