Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05075278

Supervision Models in Training Environments

Attending physicians often supervise novice junior residents in a direct one-to-one format. Alternatively, a senior resident can be paired with a new trainee under the non-direct (but immediately available) supervision of an attending physician. Resident supervision has been considered an important step towards independent practice. Both models are ubiquitous in the United States, but no study to date has been performed if one model is better than the other with respect to supervision scores.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Age range

18 year–75 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Rhode Island Hospital

Providence, Rhode Island, 02903, United States

About this study

Supervision of residents is a cornerstone of ACGME accreditation and a critical focus of any training program. A nine-faceted, validated survey has been used to assess quality and effectiveness of supervision in training environments. Residents that assign poor scores for faculty members also tend to poorly evaluate the department-at-large. Further, residents that evaluate supervisors unfavorably also tend to report more patient safety mishaps in the context of a less safe work environment. Previous literature that used this supervision scale concluded that residents who reported mean department-wide supervision scores less than 3 (frequent) reported significantly more frequent occurrences of mistakes with negative consequences to patients and medication errors.

Attending physicians often supervise novice junior residents in a direct one-to-one format. Alternatively, a senior resident can be paired with a new trainee under the non-direct (but immediately available) supervision of an attending physician. Resident supervision has been considered an important step towards independent practice.. Both models are ubiquitous in the United States, but no study to date has been performed if one model is better than the other with respect to supervision scores.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • New incoming anesthesia residents assigned to healthy patients (ASA physical status classifications of 1 or 2).

Exclusion criteria

  • New incoming anesthesia residents assigned to patients with ASA physical status classifications 3 or greater.

Treatment and study plan

survey

Behavioral

A survey will be completed by the participants at the conclusion of each day.

Primary outcomes

  1. Supervision evaluation questionnaire

    Time frame: At the conclusion of each day for 16 consecutive days

    A series of questions pertaining to planning perianesthesia care, feedback, availability, opportunities, stimulating patient based learning, professionalism, interpersonal skills, presence, and safety. It questions are scored using a 4-point Likert scale (never = 1, rarely = 2, frequently = 3, and always = 4). A score less than 3 is associated with more frequent occurrences of mistakes.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Short Form

    Time frame: At the conclusion of each day for 16 consecutive days

    (Strongly agree=5, Agree=4, Neither=3, Disagree=2, Strongly Disagree=1).

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Rhode Island Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Assessing the Quality and Effectiveness of Two Common Supervision Models in Training Environments Using a Validated Supervision Instrument

Acronym: VSI

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Oct 12, 2021
Registry last updated
Feb 8, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.