Teaching Professionalism in Orthopaedic Residency

10.6145/jme.202406_28(2).0001

Manuela Gaviria；Daniel Raza；Conner T. Callaway；Victoria K. Ierulli；Mary K. Mulcahey

professionalism ； medical education ； GME ； orthopaedic surgery residency ； resident curriculum ； teaching professionalism

Journal of Medical Education

28卷2期（2024 / 06 / 01）

90 - 100

英文

Purpose: To investigate what resources are available in orthopaedic surgery residency programs to teach professionalism and identify any challenges Program Directors (PDs) face in fulfilling the values and mission of regulatory bodies, such as the ACGME, the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS), and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed to orthopaedic residency program directors (PDs) at ACGME-accredited programs within the United States who are also members of the Collaborative Orthopaedic Educational Research Group (COERG) via email using Qualtrics (Provo, UT). Results: Five of 6 (86%) PDs reported having educational resources dedicated to developing professionalism in residency at their programs. Four of 6 (67%) PDs agreed that training in professionalism should be required. Factors that prevented programs from developing professionalism resources or educational content included time, cost, and a lack of a standard curriculum. Conclusions: Professionalism requirements have been defined by the ACGME, ABOS, AAOS, and other regulatory bodies. To promote high-quality patient care, professionalism must be at the core of residency education. Surveyed PDs at ACGME-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs largely agreed on the importance of teaching professionalism in residency. Factors noted to make professionalism challenging to teach included the lack of a standard curriculum, lack of time and funding, unclear effectiveness of teaching methods, and varying assessment modalities. Future work should focus on modifying and enhancing current available teaching modalities, and testing new tools and curricula for validity, reliability, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness.