Strategies for increasing the feasibility of performance assessments during competency-based education: Subjective and objective evaluations correlate in the operating room

- The accuracy of staff surgeons' trainee performance assessments was sought.
- Staff surgeons were positively correlated to an external assessor.
- Staff surgeons were less stringent compared with this external assessor counterpart.
- These findings are timely as competency-based assessments are implemented.

BackgroundCompetency-based education necessitates assessments that determine whether trainees have acquired specific competencies. The evidence on the ability of internal raters (staff surgeons) to provide accurate assessments is mixed; however, this has not yet been directly explored in the operating room. This study's objective is to compare the ratings given by internal raters vs an expert external rater (independent to the training process) in the operating room.MethodsRaters assessed general surgery residents during a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for their technical and nontechnical performance.ResultsFifteen cases were observed. There was a moderately positive correlation (rs = .618, P = .014) for technical performance and a strong positive correlation (rs = .731, P = .002) for nontechnical performance. The internal raters were less stringent for technical (mean rank 3.33 vs 8.64, P = .007) and nontechnical (mean rank 3.83 vs 8.50, P = .01) performances.ConclusionsThis study provides evidence to help operationalize competency-based assessments.