A Statewide Surgical Coaching Program Provides Opportunity for Continuous Professional Development
A Statewide Surgical Coaching Program Provides Opportunity for Continuous Professional Development
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/sla.0000000000002341
复制
发表时间：
2018-05-01
影响因子：
9
通讯作者：
Wiegmann, Douglas A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Greenberg, Caprice C.;Ghousseini, Hala N.;Wiegmann, Douglas A.
目的：我们寻求开发和评估一个基于视频的培训计划，以供符合委员会资格/认证的外科医生使用。背景资料：多学科利用教练进行持续的专业发展；然而，指导并不是外科医生的常规工作。方法：将同行提名的外科医生作为教练进行培训，然后与参与手术的外科医生配对。在设定目标后，每对教练都会回顾参与的外科医生所做手术的视频记录。指导课程被录音、转录和编码，以确定讨论的主题。我们的教练能够利用核心原则和指导活动的有效性通过三种不同的方法进行评估：自我评估；参与者评价；以及研究小组的评估。对参与的外科医生的调查和针对教练的访谈提供了对该计划的总体反馈。所有测量采用李克特5分量表格式，范围从1（低）到5（高）。结果：教练-参与者外科医生对目标技术，认知和人际方面的表现。其他主题包括处理术中压力。教练效能的平均客观评分为3.1 +/- 0.7，具体教练活动的评分范围为2.0 - 5.0。教练和参与者的主观评分始终较高。教练们报告说，提供的培训有效地为他们准备了指导课程。参与者对与教练的互动同样持积极态度。确定的障碍与视听技术和会议安排有关。总体而言，参与者对他们的经历感到满意（平均4.4 +/- 0.7），并认为教练计划很有价值（平均4.7 +/- 0.7）。结论：这是第一份针对执业外科医生持续专业发展的跨机构外科指导的报告，展示了参与者的感知价值，以及实施这一循证项目的后勤挑战。未来的研究有必要评估教练对实践改变和患者预后的影响。
Objective: We sought to develop and evaluate a video-based coaching program for board-eligible/certified surgeons.Summary Background Data: Multiple disciplines utilize coaching for continuous professional development; however, coaching is not routinely employed for practicing surgeons.Methods: Peer-nominated surgeons were trained as coaches then paired with participant surgeons. After setting goals, each coaching pair reviewed video-recorded operations performed by the participating surgeon. Coaching sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify topics discussed. The effectiveness with which our coaches were able to utilize the core principles and activities of coaching was evaluated using 3 different approaches: self-evaluation; evaluation by the participants; and assessment by the study team. Surveys of participating surgeons and coach-targeted interviews provided general feedback on the program. All measures utilized a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (high).Results: Coach-participant surgeon pairs targeted technical, cognitive, and interpersonal aspects of performance. Other topics included managing intra-operative stress. Mean objective ratings of coach effectiveness was 3.1 +/- 0.7, ranging from 2.0 to 5.0 on specific activities of coaching. Subjective ratings by coaches and participants were consistently higher. Coaches reported that the training provided effectively prepared them to facilitate coaching sessions. Participants were similarly positive about interactions with their coaches. Identified barriers were related to audio-video technology and scheduling of sessions. Overall, participants were satisfied with their experience (mean 4.4 +/- 0.7) and found the coaching program valuable (mean 4.7 +/- 0.7).Conclusions: This is the first report of cross-institutional surgical coaching for the continuous professional development of practicing surgeons, demonstrating perceived value among participants, as well as logistical challenges for implementing this evidence-based program. Future research is necessary to evaluate the impact of coaching on practice change and patient outcomes.