Open AccessAssessment of medical professionalism using the Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX): A survey of faculty perception of relevance, feasibility and comprehensiveness
Author(s) -
Warren Fong,
Yu Heng Kwan,
Sungwon Yoon,
Jie Kie Phang,
Julian Thumboo,
S. C. Ng
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
the asia pacific scholar
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2424-9335
pISSN - 2424-9270
DOI - 10.29060/taps.2021-6-1/sc2358
Subject(s) - collegiality , medical education , empathy , relevance (law) , perception , rating scale , psychology , faculty development , scale (ratio) , medicine , professional development , pedagogy , social psychology , political science , developmental psychology , physics , quantum mechanics , neuroscience , law
This study aimed to examine the perception of faculty on the relevance, feasibility and comprehensiveness of the Professionalism Mini Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) in the assessment of medical professionalism in residency programmes in an Asian postgraduate training centre.Methods: Cross-sectional survey data was collected from faculty in 33 residency programmes. Items were deemed to be relevant to assessment of medical professionalism when at least 80% of the faculty gave a rating of ≥8 on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (0 representing not relevant, 10 representing very relevant). Feedback regarding the feasibility and comprehensiveness of the P-MEX assessment was also collected from the faculty through open-ended questions.Results: In total, 555 faculty from 33 residency programmes participated in the survey. Of the 21 items in the P-MEX, 17 items were deemed to be relevant. For the remaining four items ‘maintained appropriate appearance’, ‘extended his/herself to meet patient needs’, ‘solicited feedback’, and ‘advocated on behalf of a patient’, the percentage of faculty who gave a rating of ≥8 was 78%, 75%, 74%, and 69% respectively. Of the 333 respondents to the open-ended question on feasibility, 34% (n=113) felt that there were too many questions in the P-MEX. Faculty also reported that assessments about ‘collegiality’ and ‘communication with empathy’ were missing in the current P-MEX.Conclusion: The P-MEX is relevant and feasible for assessment of medical professionalism. There may be a need for greater emphasis on the assessment of collegiality and empathetic communication in the P-MEX.