Premium
A systematic review of 7 years of research on entrustable professional activities in graduate medical education, 2011–2018
Author(s) -
O'Dowd Emily,
Lydon Sinéad,
O'Connor Paul,
Madden Caoimhe,
Byrne Dara
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
medical education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.776
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1365-2923
pISSN - 0308-0110
DOI - 10.1111/medu.13792
Subject(s) - cinahl , psycinfo , medline , scopus , medical education , medicine , systematic review , curriculum , psychology , nursing , psychological intervention , pedagogy , political science , law
Purpose This review aimed to synthesise some of the extant work on the use of entrustable professional activities ( EPA s) for postgraduate physicians, to assess the quality of the work and provide direction for future research and practice. Method Systematic searches were conducted within five electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Psyc INFO and CINAHL ) in September 2018. Reference lists, Google Scholar and Google were also searched. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs ( QATSDD ). Results In total, 49 studies were included, classified as Development of EPA s ( n = 37; 76% of total included), Implementation and/or assessment of EPA s ( n = 10; 20%), or both ( n = 2; 4%). EPA s were described for numerous specialties, including internal medicine ( n = 14; 36%), paediatrics ( n = 8; 21%) and psychiatry ( n = 4; 10%). Of the development studies, 92% utilised more than one method to generate EPA s. The two most commonly used methods were developing initial EPA s in a working group, ( n = 27; 69%) and revising through deliberation ( n = 21; 54%). Development papers were of variable quality (mean QATSDD score = 20, range 6–41). Implementation and assessment studies utilised methods that included observing trainee performance ( n = 6; 50%) and enrolling trainees in competency‐based curricula, which included EPA s ( n = 4; 33%). The methodological quality of these implementation studies varied (mean QATSDD score = 19.5, range = 6–32). Conclusions This review highlighted a need for: (i) consideration of best practice guidelines for EPA development; (ii) focus on the methodological quality of research on EPA development and of EPA s, and (iii) further work investigating the implementation of EPA s in the curriculum.