Early Experience in Implementation of a Learning Assessment Toolkit in the AOTrauma Geriatric Fracture Course

• Main Authors: Natasha T. O’Malley FRCS, Michael Cunningham PhD, Frankie Leung FRCS, Michael Blauth MD, Stephen L. Kates MD
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SAGE Publishing 2011-09-01
• Series: Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458511423646
• ISSN: 2151-4585; 2151-4593

Background: Surgical education is continually expanding to encompass new techniques and technologies. It is vital that educational activity is directed at gaps in knowledge and ability to improve the quality of learning. Aim: The aim of this study is to describe a published learning assessment toolkit when applied to participants attending AOTrauma Orthogeriatric Fracture courses. Methods: Precourse, participants received a questionnaire covering 10 competencies to assess knowledge gaps and a 20-question clinical knowledge test. The knowledge gap between perceived and desired knowledge was correlated with clinical knowledge test results to help course faculty focus the course curriculum to meet identified educational needs. A commitment to change survey was also administered. Results: Over 3 courses, 48% of registered attendees responded to the precourse survey, 44.5% responded postcourse. The precourse gap scores were generally highest for 2 competencies (“address secondary prevention,” “build a system of care”) indicating a higher level of motivation to learn in these topics and lowest for a variety of competencies (eg. “restore function early,” “co-manage patient care in the US surgeons group”) indicating lower motivation to learn in these competencies. These precourse gap scores guided adaptations in the course structure. Postcourse gaps were reduced in the 4 cohorts. Large improvements were seen in “Address secondary prevention” and “Build a system of care” in many of the cohorts. Competencies with the lowest precourse knowledge test scores were noted in each cohort. Where low pretest scores were noted, it highlighted the need for faculty to put appropriate emphasis on these topics in the delivery of the course content. Conclusion: The technique of evaluating and identifying gaps in knowledge and ability allows course designers to focus on areas of deficits. Measurable success was shown with a subjectively decreased gap score and objectively improved clinical knowledge, as demonstrated by improved test results after course completion.