Working with entrustable professional activities in clinical education in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review
Pinilla et al. BMC Medical Education
(2021) 21:172
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02608-9
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Working with entrustable professional
activities in clinical education in
undergraduate medical education: a
scoping review
Severin Pinilla1,2* , Eric Lenouvel1, Andrea Cantisani3, Stefan Klöppel1, Werner Strik3, Sören Huwendiek2 and
Christoph Nissen3
Abstract
Background: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are increasingly used in undergraduate medical education
(UME). We conducted a scoping review to summarize the evidence for the use of EPAs in clinical rotations in UME.
Methods: We searched multiple databases for scoping reviews based on the PRISMA guidelines for articles
reporting qualitative and quantitative research, as well as conceptual and curriculum development reports, on EPAs
in UME clinical rotations.
Results: We identified 3309 records by searching through multiple databases. After the removal of duplicates, 1858
reports were screened. A total of 36 articles were used for data extraction. Of these, 47% reported on EPA and EPAbased curriculum development for clerkships, 50% reported on implementation strategies, and 53% reported on
assessment methods and tools used in clerkships. Validity frameworks for developing EPAs in the context of
clerkships were inconsistent. Several specialties reported feasible implementation strategies for EPA-based clerkship
curricula, however, these required additional faculty time and resources. Limited exposure to clinical activities was
identified as a barrier to relevant learning experiences. Educators used nationally defined, or specialty-specific EPAs,
and a range of entrustability and supervision scales. We found only one study that used an empirical research
approach for EPA assessment. One article reported on the earlier advancement of trainees from UME to graduate
medical education based on summative entrustment decisions.
Conclusions: There is emerging evidence concerning how EPAs can be effectively introduced to clinical training in
UME. Specialty-specific, nested EPAs with context-adapted, entrustment-supervision scales might be helpful in
better leveraging their formative assessment potential.
Keywords: Entrustable professional activities, Undergraduate medical education, Clinical education, Scoping review
* Correspondence:
1
University Hospital of Old Age Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of
Bern, Bern, Switzerland
2
Department for Assessment and Evaluation, Institute for Medical Education,
University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if
changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons
licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons
licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the
data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Pinilla et al. BMC Medical Education
(2021) 21:172
Background
Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) have been
internationally implemented in graduate medical education (GME) as units of clinical activities that can be
entrusted to medical trainees in the clinical workplace
[1]. Given that the clinical learning trajectory begins well
before entering residency, medical educators have begun
to explore how to apply EPAs into undergraduate medical education (UME) as well [2]. Ideally, the intensity of
supervision and, inversely, the degree of independence,
should change during and with each clinical rotation of
medical students. EPAs, as competency-based learning
goals, take a central place within competency-based curricula in medical education. However, the rapidly growing literature on EPAs in UME has not been synthesized
from the perspective of clinical educators in UME.
Globally, clinical rotations represent a foundational
element in UME [3]. However, the degree of students’
active participation in both the workplace and curricular
design differ considerably across medical education systems [3]. Recently, longitudinally integrated clerkships
have been recommended to provide educational continuity [4]. Currently, most medical schools still work
with clinical rotations that are limited to a few weeks
within given specialties [5]. From an assessment perspective, using summative assessments that are limited to
four- to six-week clerkships is not ideal. However, short
clinical rotations do provide important formative learning and assessment opportunities for medical students
[6]. It is in this context that EPAs could be used to scaffold longitudinal and formative assessment systems, even
if clerkship curricula are not longitudinally integrated
[7]. Assessment data points collected during these clinical rotations could also inform summative entrustment
decisions within overarching assessment programs [8].
Clinical educators represent a key stakeholder group
when it comes to working with EPAs in the clinical
workplace. In the review by Shorey et al. [9], the authors
suggested that educators engaging with competencybased medical education should consider development,
implementation, and the assessment of EPAs as discrete
steps, and that stakeholder specific recommendations
are needed. The review of Meyer et al. [2] addressed the
question of assessing EPAs in UME and revealed the inconsistent use of terms and concepts related to EPAs.
Furthermore, in general, quality criteria for good assessments have not been sufficiently considered for EPAs in
UME.
In light of these previous reviews, the rapid growth of
literature concerning EPAs, and emerging research on
the pre-clerkship use of EPAs as learning goals [10, 11]
we searched the literature for articles that provided evidence on how to work with EPAs in workplace-based
learning contexts in UME. Specifically, we tried to
Page 2 of 10
address the evidence concerning how to develop, implement, and assess EPAs in different specialties and educational systems from a clinical educator’s perspective in
UME and to contrast these findings with current best
practice recommendations in GME. We also aimed to
highlight important research gaps that should be addressed to advance (...truncated)