What and how to evaluate clinical–surgical competence. The resident and staff surgeon perspective

AbstractBackgroundEvaluation is a means for significant and rigorous improvement of the educational process. Therefore, competence evaluation should allow assessing the complex activity of medical care, as well as improving the training process. This is the case in the evaluation process of clinical–surgical competences.Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study was designed to measure knowledge about the evaluation of clinical–surgical competences for the General Surgery residency programme at the Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua (UACH). A 55-item questionnaire divided into six sections was used (perception, planning, practice, function, instruments and strategies, and overall evaluation), with a six level Likert scale, performing a descriptive, correlation and comparative analysis, with a significance level of 0.001.ResultsIn both groups perception of evaluation was considered as a further qualification. As regards tools, the best known was the written examination. As regards function, evaluation was considered as a further administrative requirement. In the correlation analysis, evaluation was perceived as qualification and was significantly associated with measurement, assessment and accreditation. In the comparative analysis between residents and staff surgeons, a significant difference was found as regards the perception of the evaluation as a measurement of knowledge (Student's t test: p=0.04).ConclusionThe results provide information about the concept we have about the evaluation of clinical–surgical competences, considering it as a measure of learning achievement for a socially required certification. There is confusion as regards the perception of evaluation, its function, goals and scopes as benefit for those evaluated