中国全科医学

• •

构建临床住培基地(综合医院)全科医学师资质量评价指标体系的研究

赵稳稳, 李诺雅, 张雅丽, 张金佳, 张敏, 刘华雷, 席彪, 王荣英   

  • 收稿日期:2023-11-21 修回日期:2024-03-28 接受日期:2024-03-28
  • 通讯作者: 王荣英
  • 基金资助:
    2021年全科医学教育教学研究课题(A-YXGP 20210401)

Research on Evaluation of Quality Evaluation System of General Practice Faculty in Standardized Clinical Residency Training Bases(General Hospitals)

ZHAO Wenwen,LI Nuoya,ZHANG Yali,ZHANG Jinjia,ZHANG Min,LIU Hualei,XI Biao,WANG Rongying   

  • Received:2023-11-21 Revised:2024-03-28 Accepted:2024-03-28
  • Contact: WANG Rongying
  • Supported by:
    General practice education teaching research topic in 2021(A-YXGP 20210401)
分享到

摘要: 背景 全科医学师资的质量直接影响到全科医生的质量,影响着全科医学的发展。在英国、澳大利亚、美国等发达国家已经建立了完整适用的全科医学师资质量评价体系,全科医学师资的纳入、培训和考核标准严格,同时职业发展和支撑体系也较完善。目前我国尚未建立此评价指标体系。目的 在应用德尔菲法及层析分析法的基础上构建临床住培基地(综合医院)全科医学师资质量评价指标体系。方法 2022年6月—2023年8月,由10名研究者组成研究团队,通过系统综述的方法,对资料进行合并、分析,并从研究资料中提炼出质量评价的指标和标准,通过专题小组讨论对评价指标和标准进行逐个、严格评价和分析,并总结出具体指标和标准,最终形成第一轮德尔菲专家咨询问卷。然后从全国各地区选取专家39名,以 E-mail 或微信发放问卷的方式邀请专家参加专家咨询,最终进行了三轮专家咨询,逐步对初步设计的评价体系进行指标筛选、权重设计和评价标准修改。结果 经过3轮专家咨询,构建了包含5个一级指标(教学条件、教学素养、医疗能力、教学能力、研究能力)、18个二级指标、49个三级指标及其评价标准在内的三级指标评价与认证指标体系,并对各级指标进行权重分析、确定权重。结论 本研究提供了开发和完善临床住培基地(综合医院)全科医学师资质量评价体系的方法、过程和经验。初步建立以教学能力为评价重点的全科医学师资质量评价指标体系。

关键词: 全科医学, 综合医院, 临床师资, 质量评价

Abstract: Abstract Background Ensuring the quality of general practice faculty is an important basis for training qualified general practitioners and an important guarantee for promoting the development of general practice. United Kingdom, Australia, the United States have established a complete set of applicable teacher quality standards system, teacher access, training process and assessment are strict, while career development and support systems are perfect. At present, At present, this evaluation system has not yet been established in China. Objective To construct the model for evaluating the quality of teachers in general practice in Standardized Clinical Residency Training Bases(General Hospitals)based on Delphi method and chromatography analysis. Method From June 2022 to August 2023, a research team of 10 researchers was formed. Various materials were included through literature search, and evaluation indicators and standards were extracted. Through thematic group discussions, in-depth analysis of evaluation indicators was conducted and specific indicators and standards were extracted. The comprehensive results were formed into a Delphi expert consultation questionnaire (the first round). Then select 39 experts from various regions across the country and invite them to participate in 2 or 3 rounds of Delphi expert consultation through questionnaires distributed via email or WeChat. Conduct indicator screening, weight design, and evaluation standard modification on the preliminarily designed evaluation system. Results After three rounds of expert consultation, a three-level indicator evaluation model was constructed, including 5 first level indicators (teaching conditions, teaching literacy, medical ability, teaching ability, research ability), 18 second level indicators, 49 third level indicators, and their evaluation standards. The weights of each level of indicator were analyzed and determined. Conclusion This study provides methods, processes, and experiences for the development and improvement of standardized clinical residency training bases(general hospitals) general practice faculty quality evaluation system. Preliminary establishment of the quality evaluation index system of general practice faculty with teaching ability as the focus.

Key words: General practice, General Hospital, Clinical faculty, Quality evaluation