背景:沙特急诊医学委员会(SBEM)被要求指派包括计划负责人在内的教育工作者来监督其居民。这些教育者可能会影响居民的学术和临床表现。经过全面审查,我们注意到,目前的文献缺乏关于急诊医学教育者对其居民的学术和临床表现的直接影响的信息。本研究的主要目的是评估居民的信心水平,并衡量项目负责人在利雅得医院接受SBEM培训期间对居民表现的满意度。
方法:这项同时进行的混合方法研究在利雅得的9家培训医院进行,沙特阿拉伯,在2021-2022学年期间。对于定量方面,使用了横断面调查,基于使用非概率方便抽样技术对PGY-4SBEM居民(n=120)的研究生年(PGY)-2进行的问卷调查。该调查旨在评估居民对其学术和临床表现的信心,受教育者的影响。李克特量表共有25个项目,涵盖CANMED框架的七个角色,被雇用。此评估使用了一种称为培训中评估报告的已发布工具。对于定性方面,项目主管的观点是通过一对一的非结构化访谈收集的(n=9),以理论饱和度为指导。采用有目的的抽样技术来选择计划负责人。采访工具收集了人口统计数据,包括性别,多年的经验,和培训医院,包括17个开放式问题,以探讨项目主管的意见。
结果:混合方法的结果表明,定量和定性数据集在所有独立变量(居民年龄,性别,和培训水平),培训医院除外,培训医院是趋同的。因此,居民对他们的机构教育者引起的学术和临床表现的信心很高。然而,项目主任指出了与住院医师培训水平有关的变化。
结论:居民对由其机构教育者引起的学业和临床表现的信心很高。教育者对居民的学术和临床表现有很大的影响。然而,项目主管认为居民的表现有些问题。大多数项目主管还认为,可能影响居民整体表现的几个影响因素包括压力和建设性反馈的接收。
BACKGROUND: The Saudi Board of Emergency Medicine (SBEM) is required to assign educators including program directors to supervise their residents. These educators may impact the residents\' academic and clinical performances. After thorough review, we noticed that the current literature lacks information about the direct influence of emergency medicine educators on their residents\' academic and clinical performances. The main purpose of this study is to assess the residents\' confidence level, and to measure the program directors\' satisfaction of the residents\' performances during their SBEM training years in Riyadh hospitals.
METHODS: This concurrent mixed-methods study was conducted in nine training hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, during the 2021-2022 academic year. For the quantitative aspect, a cross-sectional survey was used, based on a questionnaire administered to postgraduate year (PGY)-2 to PGY-4 SBEM residents (n=120) using a nonprobability convenient sampling technique. The survey aimed to assess residents\' confidence in their academic and clinical performance, influenced by their educators. A Likert scale with a total of 25 items, covering the seven roles of the CANMEDs framework, was employed. This assessment utilized a published tool called the In-Training Evaluation Report. For the qualitative aspect, program directors\' perspectives were gathered through one-on-one unstructured interviews (n=9), guided by theoretical saturation. A purposive sampling technique was employed to select program directors. The interview tool collected demographic data, including gender, years of experience, and training hospital, and included 17 open-ended questions to explore program directors\' opinions.
RESULTS: The result of mixed methods showed that both quantitative and qualitative data sets were divergent with all independent variables (resident\'s age, gender, and training level) with the exception of the training hospital which was convergent. Thus, the residents\' confidence toward their academic and clinical performances induced by their institutional educators was high. However, the program directors indicated changes that related to residents\' training level.
CONCLUSIONS: The residents\' confidence toward their academic and clinical performance induced by their institutional educators was high. The educators had a great deal of influence over the academic and clinical performance of the residents. However, the program directors thought there were some issues with the performance of the residents. Most of the program directors also believed that several influential factors that may have affected the residents\' overall performance include stress and receipt of constructive feedback.