{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02510460251046025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017201301720130173, 'mean_word_length': 5.385756676557864, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EVALUATION, FEEDBACK AND REMEDIATION IN ANESTHESIOLOGY RESIDENCY TRAINING: A SURVEY OF 124 UNITED STATES PROGRAMS.

PURPOSE
It was the purpose of this study to provide a review of evaluation, feedback and remediation methods in U.S. residency programs during 1995-96. The information gathered is to serve as a framework for discussions within and amongst programs regarding ways to enhance their current processes of evaluation, feedback and remediation, and to serve a baseline for future assessments.


METHODS
A three-page survey was sent to the program director of each of the 145 anesthesiology programs listed in the ACGME/NRMP Directory. Information about the resident evaluation process (including techniques of gathering information, frequency of evaluations, faculty compliance, and modes of offering feedback), departmental clinical competence committee, probation and remediation policies for problem residents, and the use of formal examinations during residency was sought.


RESULTS
There was an 86.1% response rate. Frequency of evaluation of residents ranged from daily through quarterly: evaluations used both narrative comments and rating scales in 89% of institutions. Faculty compliance in the evaluation process was greater than 75% in 45.1% of programs. Only 25 programs offered formal training about resident evaluation to their faculty. Clinical competence committee meetings average five times annually and 95% of committees are chaired by someone other than the Department Chairperson. 27% of them have resident members. 67.7% of programs have a written policy regarding problem residents, while 82.2% report having a formal probation policy. 48.3% programs use standardized tests to provide feedback and guidance to their residents.


CONCLUSIONS
There is a tremendous variety of techniques and methodologies employed among anesthesiology residency programs with regard to evaluation, feedback, and remediation, within the framework of the ACGME guidelines. Providing faculty training in assessment of, and offering feedback to, residents is one area in which many programs can begin to strengthen their current procedures.