Search

Background: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA) and competencies represent components of a competency-based education framework. EPAs are assessed based on the level of supervision (LOS) necessary to perform the activity safely and effectively. The broad competencies, broken down into narrower subcompetencies, are assessed using milestones, observable behaviors of one's abilities along a developmental spectrum. Integration of the two methods, accomplished by mapping the most relevant subcompetencies to each EPA, may provide a cross check between the two forms of assessment and uncover those subcompetencies that have the greatest influence on the EPA assessment., Objectives: We hypothesized that 1) there would be a strong correlation between EPA LOS ratings with the milestone levels for the subcompetencies mapped to the EPA; 2) some subcompetencies would be more critical in determining entrustment decisions than others, and 3) the correlation would be weaker if the analysis included only milestones reported to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)., Methods: In fall 2014 and spring 2015, the Subspecialty Pediatrics Investigator Network asked Clinical Competency Committees to assign milestone levels to each trainee enrolled in a pediatric fellowship for all subcompetencies mapped to 6 Common Pediatric Subspecialty EPAs as well as provide a rating for each EPA based upon a 5-point LOS scale., Results: One-thousand forty fellows were assessed in fall and 1048 in spring, representing about 27% of all fellows. For each EPA and in both periods, the average milestone level was highly correlated with LOS (rho range 0.59-0.74; p < 0.001). Correlations were similar when using a weighted versus unweighted milestone score or using only the ACGME reported milestones (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: We found a strong relationship between milestone level and EPA LOS rating but no difference if the subcompetencies were weighted, or if only milestones reported to the ACGME were used. Our results suggest that representative behaviors needed to effectively perform the EPA, such as key subcompetencies and milestones, allow for future language adaptations while still supporting the current model of assessment. In addition, these data provide additional validity evidence for using these complementary tools in building a program of assessment., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: To determine the relationship between level of supervision (LOS) ratings for the Common Pediatric Subspecialty Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) with their associated subcompetency milestones across subspecialties and by fellowship training year., Methods: Clinical Competency Committees (CCCs) in 14 pediatric subspecialties submitted LOS ratings for 6 Common Subspecialty EPAs and subcompetency milestone levels mapped to these EPAs. We examined associations between these subcompetency milestone levels and LOS ratings across subspecialty training year by fitting per-EPA linear mixed effects models, regressing LOS rating on milestone level and on training year., Results: CCCs from 211 pediatric fellowship programs provided data for 369 first, 336 second, and 331 third year fellows. Mean subcompetency milestone levels increased similarly among subspecialties for most EPAs compared with the reference, Adolescent Medicine. Mean subcompetency milestones mapped to each EPA and mean EPA LOS ratings generally increased by training year across all subspecialties., Conclusions: Subcompetency milestones levels mapped to each Common Subspecialty EPA and the EPA LOS ratings increase similarly across subspecialties and by training year, providing validity evidence for using EPA LOS to assess pediatric subspecialty trainee performance. This study supports the development of tools to facilitated the CCC evaluation process across all pediatric subspecialties., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) represent the routine and essential activities that physicians perform in practice. Although some level of supervision scales have been proposed, they have not been validated. In this study, the investigators created level of supervision scales for EPAs common to the pediatric subspecialties and then examined their validity in a study conducted by the Subspecialty Pediatrics Investigator Network (SPIN)., Method: SPIN Steering Committee members used a modified Delphi process to develop unique scales for six of the seven common EPAs. The investigators sought validity evidence in a multisubspecialty study in which pediatric fellowship program directors and Clinical Competency Committees used the scales to evaluate fellows in fall 2014 and spring 2015., Results: Separate scales for the six EPAs, each with five levels of progressive entrustment, were created. In both fall and spring, more than 300 fellows in each year of training from over 200 programs were assessed. In both periods and for each EPA, there was a progressive increase in entrustment levels, with second-year fellows rated higher than first-year fellows (P < .001) and third-year fellows rated higher than second-year fellows (P < .001). For each EPA, spring ratings were higher (P < .001) than those in the fall. Interrater reliability was high (Janson and Olsson's iota = 0.73)., Conclusions: The supervision scales developed for these six common pediatric subspecialty EPAs demonstrated strong validity evidence for use in EPA-based assessment of pediatric fellows. They may also inform the development of scales in other specialties.