Skip to content

Supervision Models in Training Environments

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

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05075278
Acronym
VSI
Enrollment
20
Registered
2021-10-12
Start date
2021-07-07
Completion date
2022-07-30
Last updated
2023-02-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anesthesia, Supervision

Brief summary

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.

Detailed description

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.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALSurvey

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

Sponsors

Rhode Island Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

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.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Supervision evaluation questionnaireAt the conclusion of each day for 16 consecutive daysA 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

MeasureTime frameDescription
Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Short FormAt the conclusion of each day for 16 consecutive days(Strongly agree=5, Agree=4, Neither=3, Disagree=2, Strongly Disagree=1).

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026