Department of Surgery Evaluation, Feedback and Resident Development

Resident performance is closely monitored by the attending staff.  Formal evaluations are made on a monthly basis.  If deficiencies in skill or knowledge are found, a plan to correct the situation is implemented immediately.  All residents are required to sit for the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination annually.

Evaluation. As per recommendations from the ACGME, our program employs a multisource evaluation methodology (a.k.a. 360-degree Assessment), whereby residents are evaluated by faculty, fellows, medical students, other residents, and themselves.  Multisource evaluation is based on the assumption that multiple sources of assessment (i.e. faculty, peers, students, self) each offer somewhat unique data on resident performance.  We use New Innovations (www.new-innov.com) to administer and collect faculty and peer evaluations of residents.

• Faculty Evaluations of Residents: Faculty surgeons evaluate each resident with whom they have worked at the end of each rotation using a global rating form on New Innovations to assess performance related to each of the ACGME core competencies.
• Resident Peer Evaluation: Twice per year, all General Surgery residents are required to complete a global rating form on New Innovations assessing themselves and their peers (i.e. all other residents with whom they have worked during the prior ~ 6 months) with respect to performance related to each of the ACGME core competencies.
• Student Evaluation of Residents: Each third-year surgical clerk from New York Medical College, who participates in 8-week rotations as part of the General Surgery resident teams, anonymously evaluates the residents with whom he/she worked using a global rating form assessing interpersonal and communication skills, teaching and professionalism.
• Resident Self Evaluation: Residents, prior to semi-annual meetings with the program director, are asked to complete a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis about their performance.
• Objective Evaluation: Recognizing the subjectivity of ratings-based evaluation, our program also considers a variety of objective data when evaluating residents.  All residents are required to sit for the annual American Board of Surgery In-Training Exam (ABSITE).  Additionally, some of our conferences have required presentations, assignments and quizzes.  Resident performance in Minimally Invasive Surgery Skills Labs / Pig Labs and in human patient simulators is important for evaluating surgical technical skills.  We also consider conference attendance, procedure logs, and research activity when analyzing resident performance.
• Resident Review Committee: The program’s Resident Review Committee meets twice a year, and is comprised of representative surgical faculty from each of the surgical clinical specialties through which our residents rotate. Each resident’s performance evaluation data and progress in the program is discussed in detail with the Committee. The Program Director leads discussion about each resident’s conference attendance, completion of assignments and paperwork, and participation in research and other educational and scholarly activities. Committee members comment on each resident’s performance and suggest how the program can best help the resident improve in areas of deficiencies.

Feedback and Development. Residents have access to completed evaluations by Faculty at any time either by logging in to New Innovations or viewing their folder in the Residency Coordinator’s office.  Additionally, a comprehensive, individualized feedback report is generated for and distributed to each resident on a semi-annual basis.  The Program Director or Associate Program Director meets with each resident twice a year to discuss their performance and to assist in creating a developmental plan to address deficiencies based on the SWOT analysis. 

• Immediate Feedback: Faculty evaluations of residents are available for review the moment they are submitted on New Innovations.  Residents have access to both the individual completed evaluations and a summary report that updates automatically as new evaluations are submitted by Faculty.  Faculty are encouraged to discuss their evaluations of residents at the end of each rotation. 
• Semi-annual Feedback Report: Data gathered from the various sources is synthesized and summarized in an individualized report that is distributed to each resident semi-annually. This report includes graphic representation of each resident’s performance with respect to each competency and how it compares to their same PGY peers as well as all residents in the program. Separate graphs compare evaluations from the various sources (i.e. students, peers, faculty). We also include with the evaluation report a blank sheet for SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) related to each of the core competencies. Residents are instructed to review and reflect on their assessment data and attempt to complete a SWOT Analysis aimed at improving performance prior to meeting with Dr. Savino and/or Yelon.
• Semi-Annual Developmental Meeting: Twice a year, the Program Director/Associate Program Director meets with every single resident in the program to discuss their performance for the six months prior.  During this meeting, the resident’s evaluation data, feedback report and comments or suggestions from the Resident Review Committee are reviewed; their SWOT analysis is discussed and modified and a developmental plan for the next six months is established. The resulting document is signed by the resident and Program Director/Associate Program Director, thereby creating a learning contract. This document is kept in each resident’s folder and they take a copy with them to reference when needed.

Evaluation of Faculty, Rotations and the Program

At the end of each rotation, Residents are asked to complete anonymous evaluations of Faculty and Rotations using global rating scales on New Innovations.  Faculty are never allowed to see individual completed evaluations by residents.  Faculty have access to feedback reports that summarize this data in December and June, thereby further protecting resident anonymity.  Faculty are also evaluated by the Program Director and complete self evaluations annually.  In addition to online evaluations on New Innovations, residents are given the opportunity to complete paper based evaluations of Faculty and Rotations, should they prefer.  Data from these evaluations are used to help Faculty develop their teaching skills and to improve rotations.

Residents are asked to complete evaluations of the General Surgery program on a semi-annual basis.  This comprehensive evaluation survey may be completed online on New Innovations, or by hand using printed versions of the same survey.  The results of this survey are summarized and distributed to Faculty and Residents semi-annually.

Resident Education Committee.  A dedicated group of Faculty meets every week to discuss the educational program and evaluation data, and to monitor the progress of the program very carefully.  This committee includes the Program Director, Associate Program Director, Professional Educators, Champions of Surgical Education (in General Surgery, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Vascular Surgery and Surgical Oncology), and the Chief Residents.

Residency Curriculum Committee.  The Residency Curriculum Committee meets twice a year, and is comprised of representative surgical faculty from each of the surgical clinical specialties through which the residents rotate and resident representatives from each PGY level.  This committee reviews and discusses evaluation data of Faculty, Rotations and the Program with the purpose of identifying deficiencies and coming up with solutions when needed.