A multispecialty ethnographic study of clinical competency committees (CCCs)

Bibliographic Data

ID21448302
AuthorsAndem Ekpenyong (0000-0003-0475-7791, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA, corresponding author), Laura Edgar (0000-0002-0305-7980, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Chicago, IL, USA), LuAnn Wilkerson (0000-0002-6089-4603, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA), Eric S Holmboe (0000-0003-0108-6021, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Chicago, IL, USA)
Year2022
Volume44
Issue11
Pages1228-1236
Publication date2022-11-02
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedical Teacher (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0142-159X • E-ISSN: 1466-187X
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/0142159x.2022.2072281
PMID35635737
OpenAlexW4281648763
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited24

PURPOSE: Clinical competency committees (CCCs) assess residents' performance on their specialty specific milestones, however there is no 'one-size fits all' blueprint for accomplishing this. Thus, CCCs have had to develop their own procedures. The goal of this study was to examine these efforts to assist new programs embarking on this venture and established programs looking to improve their CCC practices and processes. METHODS: We purposefully sampled CCCs across multiple specialties and institutions. Data from three sources were triangulated: (1) online demographic survey, (2) ethnographic observations of CCC meetings and (3) post-observation semi-structured interviews with the program director and/or CCC chairperson. Template analysis was used to build the coding structure. RESULTS: Sixteen observations were completed with 15 different CCCs at 9 institutions. Three main thematic categories that impact the operations of CCCs emerged: (1) Membership structure and members roles, (2) Roles of the CCC in residency and 3) CCC processes, including trainee presentation to the committee and decision-making. While effective practices were observed, substantial variation existed in all three thematic areas. CONCLUSIONS: While CCCs used some known effective practices, substantial variation in structure and processes was notable across CCCs. Future work should explore the impact of this variation on educational outcomes

Ethnography · Medical education · Sociology · Global Health Workforce Issues · Innovations in Medical Education · Interprofessional Education and Collaboration · Medicine · Psychology

Tools

Open DOI