Trainee-Physician Milestones Ratings and Patient Experience Surveys in Early Unsupervised Practice.

IF 9.7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jenny X Chen, Deirdre Mylod, Yuezhou Jing, Madeleine Kerschner, Bruce Trock, Steve Meth, Kenji Yamazaki, Sean O Hogan, Misop Han
{"title":"Trainee-Physician Milestones Ratings and Patient Experience Surveys in Early Unsupervised Practice.","authors":"Jenny X Chen, Deirdre Mylod, Yuezhou Jing, Madeleine Kerschner, Bruce Trock, Steve Meth, Kenji Yamazaki, Sean O Hogan, Misop Han","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.36380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Milestones ratings have been used to assess resident physicians for more than a decade, but little is known as to whether there are posttraining implications of ratings for patient experiences.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the association of residents' Milestones ratings of professionalism and interpersonal and communication skills (ICS) with patient experience survey results in the first year of unsupervised practice.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included physicians who completed residency training at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019, and subsequently worked at facilities that collected Clinician & Group-Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surveys (CG-CAHPS). Milestones ratings from adult primary care training programs (internal medicine, family medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology) and patient survey data were linked for physicians who had more than 30 CG-CAHPS results in their first year of unsupervised practice. Physician characteristics (sex and specialty), CG-CAHPS patient respondent demographics (sex, race, and language spoken at home), and a CG-CAHPS question about a facility-related experience were collected for multivariable linear regression analyses. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2024 to April 10, 2025.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>Mean professionalism and ICS scores in Milestones evaluations collected 6 months before the end of training. Physicians were categorized into those with higher (≥3.5) or lower (<3.5) mean scores.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>CG-CAHPS Top Box scores for 6 questions pertaining to physician behaviors and the overall clinician rating. (Top Box scores denote the percentage of patients who selected the most favorable response option.).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1349 physicians (753 [55.8%] aged 26-30 years; 804 [59.6%] female) were included in the analysis. Higher mean professionalism or ICS Milestones ratings were associated with higher Top Box scores across all CG-CAHPS questions pertaining to physician-related experiences (eg, adjusted mean difference in physician's knowledge of the patient's medical history: professionalism, 2.9 [95% CI, 1.4-4.5] percentage points; P < .001; ICS, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.5-4.9] percentage points; P < .001) as well as overall physician ratings (adjusted mean difference: professionalism, 2.9 [95% CI, 1.4-4.3] percentage points; P < .001; ICS, 3.5 [95% CI, 2-5.1] percentage points; P < .001) in multivariable linear regression models.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cohort study of physicians who completed residency in adult primary care specialties, those with higher mean professionalism and ICS Milestones ratings in training received better patient experience survey ratings in their first year of unsupervised practice. These findings suggest that trainees with lower ratings may benefit from intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 10","pages":"e2536380"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.36380","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Milestones ratings have been used to assess resident physicians for more than a decade, but little is known as to whether there are posttraining implications of ratings for patient experiences.

Objective: To investigate the association of residents' Milestones ratings of professionalism and interpersonal and communication skills (ICS) with patient experience survey results in the first year of unsupervised practice.

Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cohort study included physicians who completed residency training at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019, and subsequently worked at facilities that collected Clinician & Group-Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surveys (CG-CAHPS). Milestones ratings from adult primary care training programs (internal medicine, family medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology) and patient survey data were linked for physicians who had more than 30 CG-CAHPS results in their first year of unsupervised practice. Physician characteristics (sex and specialty), CG-CAHPS patient respondent demographics (sex, race, and language spoken at home), and a CG-CAHPS question about a facility-related experience were collected for multivariable linear regression analyses. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2024 to April 10, 2025.

Exposures: Mean professionalism and ICS scores in Milestones evaluations collected 6 months before the end of training. Physicians were categorized into those with higher (≥3.5) or lower (<3.5) mean scores.

Main outcomes and measures: CG-CAHPS Top Box scores for 6 questions pertaining to physician behaviors and the overall clinician rating. (Top Box scores denote the percentage of patients who selected the most favorable response option.).

Results: A total of 1349 physicians (753 [55.8%] aged 26-30 years; 804 [59.6%] female) were included in the analysis. Higher mean professionalism or ICS Milestones ratings were associated with higher Top Box scores across all CG-CAHPS questions pertaining to physician-related experiences (eg, adjusted mean difference in physician's knowledge of the patient's medical history: professionalism, 2.9 [95% CI, 1.4-4.5] percentage points; P < .001; ICS, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.5-4.9] percentage points; P < .001) as well as overall physician ratings (adjusted mean difference: professionalism, 2.9 [95% CI, 1.4-4.3] percentage points; P < .001; ICS, 3.5 [95% CI, 2-5.1] percentage points; P < .001) in multivariable linear regression models.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study of physicians who completed residency in adult primary care specialties, those with higher mean professionalism and ICS Milestones ratings in training received better patient experience survey ratings in their first year of unsupervised practice. These findings suggest that trainees with lower ratings may benefit from intervention.

在早期无监督的实践中,实习医师里程碑评分和患者经验调查。
重要性:里程碑评级已经被用于评估住院医师超过十年,但很少有人知道是否有病人体验评级的培训后影响。目的:探讨无监督实习第一年住院医师专业精神和人际沟通能力里程碑评分与患者体验调查结果的关系。设计、环境和参与者:本回顾性队列研究包括在2015年7月1日至2019年6月30日期间在研究生医学教育认证委员会认可的项目中完成住院医师培训的医生,随后在收集医疗保健提供者和系统调查(CG-CAHPS)的临床医生和群体消费者评估机构工作。成人初级保健培训项目(内科、家庭医学和妇产科)的里程碑评分与患者调查数据相关联,这些医生在第一年的无监督实践中获得了超过30个CG-CAHPS结果。收集医生特征(性别和专业)、CG-CAHPS患者受访者人口统计(性别、种族和家庭语言)以及CG-CAHPS关于设施相关经验的问题,进行多变量线性回归分析。数据分析时间为2024年2月1日至2025年4月10日。暴露:在培训结束前6个月收集的里程碑评估中的平均专业性和ICS分数。医生被分为较高(≥3.5)和较低(主要结果和测量:CG-CAHPS Top Box得分涉及医生行为和总体临床医生评分的6个问题)。(顶框分数表示选择最有利反应选项的患者百分比。)结果:共纳入医师1349人,其中年龄26-30岁753人(55.8%),女性804人(59.6%)。较高的平均专业度或ICS里程碑评分与所有CG-CAHPS问题中与医生相关经验(例如,医生对患者病史知识的调整平均差异:专业度,2.9 [95% CI, 1.4-4.5]个百分点;结论和相关性:在这项队列研究中,完成成人初级保健专业住院医师的研究中,那些在培训中具有较高平均专业水平和ICS里程碑评分的医生在无监督实践的第一年获得了更好的患者体验调查评分。这些发现表明,评分较低的受训者可能从干预中受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信