Interventions Considered/Recommended

2x2 Resource vs. Impact Diagram

Impact

Clinical Advising Tool for Students & Advisors (CATSA) Developing & Implementing a Web Based Approach to Clinical Advising Using a Quality Improvement Model

Alison Martin, M.Ed., Jen Rachow, A.A., Nathan Beucke, M.D., Steve Thompson, B.S., Rachel Brown, MBBS, Jason Cox, M.D., Linda Headrick, M.D.

The Problem (2008)

Clinical Advising is often viewed as an activity, yet it is a process involving a complex series of

connected steps or actions with starting and end points. MU has numerous clinical advisors with

varying experience who represent a wide range of specialties. Gaps in information can lead to

advising shortfalls.

Baseline Data

Career Advising Coordinator Hired (2007) LCME Independent Student Survey (June 2007)- Career Counseling- “only 43% students were satisfied with the quality of resources available” Response rate of 88% (316/360)

GQ AAMC 2003-2008- Only 45% of our students were satisfied with career planning services

Baseline Student/Advisor Survey (2009)- Measuring Discordance

(52%) M-4 students; (52%) advisors returned surveys Students overwhelmingly don’t meet with advisors because they feel advisors are very busy

and don’t want to bother them, only 20% of advisors named clinical or other duties as barriers to meet with students.

Greater than 1/3 of advisors felt students didn’t seek help. 35% of students and only 15% of advisors feel that the program didn’t meet student needs. The majority of advisors felt they are preparing students for interviews while > 50% of students felt advisors did not help them prepare. Both students (65%) and advisors (80%) felt more structure in the program would improve

advising. 33% of advisors felt they did not have adequate resources to optimally advise students. 63% of advisors and 71% of students felt an advisement checklist would improve the

quality of advising.

What is *Quality Clinical Advising?

• Avoid harm from process intended to be beneficial SAFE

• No unnecessary delay in effort to begin and complete components of the residency preparation/application process

TIMELY

• All students receive equal access to resources and advising EQUITABLE

• Activities based on best practices and resources that have been validated EFFECTIVE

• Activities are relevant to individual needs with timely outcomes EFFICIENT

• Activities are responsive to individual preferences, needs and values STUDENT-CENTERED

*Adapted from IOM Report: Crossing the Quality Chasm, National Academy of Sciences, 2001

MU Quality Improvement Training

Identify team members

M4 Medical Student

Coordinator of Advising Services

Assistant to Dean of Students

Dean of Student Programs

Dean of Education

Identify a health care problem

Adapted to educational problem

Survey advisor & students- M3/4

advising process

Develop process flow chart

Design an intervention

2x2 resource v. impact

Paper based checklist became web

based content aggregating tool w/

checklists

Implementation /Challenges (2009-

2014)

Gather validated resources

Dedicated IT personnel

Dedicated content personnel

Beta test students/advisors(2012)

Train advisors and students (2013)

Train departmental liaisons (2013)

Maintain, update and market (2014)

Measure the Outcome

GQ AAMC- Satisfied/very satisfied

w/career planning services

2006-2009: 41%

2010- 2013: 71%

M3/M4 Survey, Feb. 2014 (N=127)

66% accessed CATSA viewing

these sections the most- C.V.,

Electives, P.S., LoRs, MSPE,

ERAS, Residency Programs

Advisor Survey, Feb. 2014(N=17)

61% know about CATSA

39% have used the CATSA

46% encourage CATSA use

20% say it has improved their

advising

High

Low

High Create

clinical

advisor

development

program

Create

advisors

who stay

with

students all

four years

Low Advisement

Checklist

Improve

advisor

orientation

materials

Reso

urc

es

Clinical Advising Process Flow Chart

Initial Clinical Advisor Meeting RE: Residency

Application

Letters of Rec- Strategies Review “deliverables” & deadlinesCV, Personal Stmt., MSPE, Step 2 CK & CS, Scheduling interviews,

Review Residency InterviewsGraduation Requirements

Accept MSPE By 9/30

Confirm Faculty LOR’s Being

Written

Discuss & Review with Advisor

CV

Submit MSPE after advisor

review

Discuss & Review with Advisor

Written Personal Statement

Discuss & Review with Advisor

MSPE

Request & have transcripts sent to

OME

Review possible Residency Interests

Strategies Program selection

order, types how to focus/limit

top priorities

Back-up PlanNeeded?

YES

Enter ROL and Certify

Complete ERAS application

Register for MatchNational

Residency Matching Program

(NRMP)Select Residency

Programs and Submit ERAS

Application

Chase Up Outstanding Documents

Decide which interviews to

attand

Review Interview Experiences

Determine strategies for the Rank Order List

(ROL)

Did I Match

SOAP Meet with

designated faculty in Clinical Dept.

MATCH DAY

NO

YES

NO

Add Programs to MyERAS

Review and Accept SOAP

offer

Sign Residency Contract

Color LegendYellow – StudentTurquoise – AdvisorRed – End Point

Meet with Dr. Brown

NO