Clinical supervisor evaluations during general surgery clerkships

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Surgical Training
• Performance Assessment

Background:

• Medical student performance in general surgery clerkships is typically evaluated by consultant surgeons.
• Consultant surgeons rarely supervise medical students directly.
• Surgical residents and interns frequently supervise and teach students but do not evaluate them.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the accuracy of general surgery clerkship performance evaluations by clinical supervisors of different seniorities.
• To investigate the validity of evaluations based on supervisor experience.

Main Methods:

• Prospective study from September 2008 to May 2010.
• 57 fourth-year medical students evaluated by 85 clinical supervisors using a multi-dimensional tool.
• Evaluation grades correlated with validated surgical objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) results.

Main Results:

• Consultant surgeon evaluations showed weak correlation (r=0.27) with OSCE results; clinical ability subtotal grades had no correlation.
• Surgical resident and intern evaluations demonstrated moderate correlations with OSCE results (r=0.49 and r=0.54).
• Evaluation validity varied significantly by supervisor seniority.

Conclusions:

• The validity of clinical supervisor evaluations in general surgery clerkships depends on the assessor's seniority.
• Incorporating evaluations from surgical residents and interns may enhance the overall validity of clerkship assessment tools.
• Improved assessment validity can enhance both summative and formative feedback for medical students.