Skip to content
ALL Metrics
-
Views
26
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article

Longitudinal survey of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
PUBLISHED 20 Jan 2022
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background. Newly graduated medical students often report that they lack the skills required to care for patients, and feel unprepared for clinical practice. However, little is known about when, and if, they acquire these skills in practice. The aim of this study was to assess self-reported level of entrustment in, and frequency of performance of, the seven Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) comprising the EPA framework for interns in Ireland. EPAs describe discrete activities that are essential to a particular profession.
Methods. Self-report survey data were collected from doctors in the Republic of Ireland during their first year of clinical practice at four different time points during 2020/21.
Results. Response rates to the survey varied from 73.3% (126/172) at Time 1 to 25.6% (44/172) at Time 4. After three months, the respondents reported that they could execute all of the EPAs, inclusive of 12 essential procedural skills, with indirect supervision. As the year progressed there was an increase in the proportion of respondents reporting that they performed the EPAs at least once a week. However, the proportion of respondents performing five of the essential procedural skills (e.g. nasogastric tube insertion) remained low across all time points.
Conclusion. Consideration should be given as to how to better prepare medical students to execute these EPAs, how the interns can be better supported during the first quarter of internship. The findings from this research are positive. However, there is an urgent need to carry out formal assessments of entrustability, rather than relying on self-report.

Keywords

Entruastable professional activities, competency based education, junior doctor, survey

Introduction

It has consistently been found that junior doctors lack the skills required to care for patients, and feel unprepared for clinical practice1,2. The training and support received by junior doctors is variable, and dependent on the setting and clinical teams in which they are placed3. Moreover, junior doctors continue to the next stages of training, not based upon a determination of whether they have developed the necessary competencies, but rather as a result of the time they have spent in the role4. The issues associated with a time-based approach to training has led to an interest in a Competency Based Medical Education (CBME) for the training of junior doctors. CBME is concerned with outcomes of the education experience, independent of time spent in education5. A particular approach to CBME that has received interest within the context of the training of junior doctors is Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs)6.

EPAs are an effort to bridge the gap between the theory of competencies and practical clinical work7. EPAs are units of professional practice that capture essential competencies in which trainees must become proficient8. EPAs describe discrete activities that can be entrusted to trainees, are essential to the profession, and encapsulate one or more core competencies9. EPAs use observable work descriptors (e.g., clerk a patient) as opposed the person-descriptors (e.g., good communicator)9. EPAs provide supervisors with a framework to support the delegation of activities to trainees8. EPAs have potential for improving the efficiency of training of junior doctors, and ensure that they perform only the activities they have been deemed safe to perform10.

In Ireland, a framework of seven EPAs (see Table 1) has been developed for the intern year (the first year of clinical practice after graduation in the Republic of Ireland). This EPA framework was developed through an iterative eight-stage consensus building with key stakeholders (see O’Dowd et al.4 for a description of this process). Levels of entrustment of trainees for each EPA are made on a scale of 1 to 5:

Table 1. Irish intern year EPAs (adapted from O’Dowd et al.4).

EPADescription
EPA 1: Clerk a patient.The doctor can clerk a patient in the outpatient and day care setting, admit a patient to the ward and
have a good understanding of decision to admit criteria.
EPA 2: Request and interpret
basic investigations.
The doctor can request appropriate and interpret basic diagnostic laboratory and radiological
investigations.
EPA 3: Perform essential
procedural skills.
By the end of internship, the doctor demonstrates confident and is skilled in performing 12 essential
clinical procedures: (1) hand hygiene; (2) venepuncture; (3) peripheral intravenous cannulation; (4) blood
cultures from a peripheral vein; (5) arterial blood gas sampling; (6) electrocardiogram; (7) nasogastric
tube insertion; (8) urinary catheter insertion; (9) preparation, reconstitution, dilution and administration
of IV drugs; (10) blood sampling & blood cultures from central line and tunelled line; (11) sterile field set
up; and (12) sterile glove application.
EPA 4: Manage the work of
in-patient care.
The doctor can manage their daily workload to prioritise, delegate tasks, advance patient flow, and
deliver patient centred care.
EPA 5: Prescribe and
monitor drugs and fluid.
The doctor can prescribe sagely in compliance with legal requirements in both a hospital and community
setting, and in an elective and emergency setting.
EPA 6: Recognise and
manage the deteriorating/
acutely unwell patient.
The doctor can identify and respond to the acutely unwell patient appropriately.
EPA 7: Handover and
discharge a patient.
The doctor can handover and receive the handover of a clinical case to/from colleagues and manage the
discharge of a patient competently.
  • 1. Observation but no execution, even with direct supervision.

  • 2. Execution with direct, proactive supervision.

  • 3. Execution with reactive supervision, i.e., on request and quickly available.

  • 4. Supervision at a distance and/or post hoc (regarded as the threshold for competent independent practice).

  • 5. Supervision provided by the trainee to more junior colleagues4.

The desirable minimum level of entrustability in these EPAs for interns is to be able to execute with reactive supervision (level 3), or supervision at a distance and/or post hoc (level 4). The rationale for the need to reach this level of entrustability is that interns tend to work autonomously with limited support from more senior doctors- particularly during night and weekend shifts11,12. Lack of supervision has been identified as a contributor to more than half of errors made by interns that ‘played on their mind’13. This issue of limited supervision is further compounded by the fact that junior doctors are also often unwilling to seek guidance and clinical support from seniors12,14. Therefore, ideally, interns should be able to execute these EPAs with indirect supervision.

The aim of this study was to assess self-reported level of entrustment within, and frequency of performance of the seven Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) comprising the EPA framework for interns in Ireland at four time points in the intern year. This will allow an indication of when, and if, interns are able to execute these EPAs without the need for direct supervision.

Methods

The study is reported in accordance with the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS)15.

Context

The intern year is the first year of postgraduate clinical practice for doctors in Ireland. Each intern is attached to one of six national intern training networks (ITN) and rotates through four clinical attachments, each of three-month duration, within the hospital group associated with their ITN. This study was carried out in one ITN. This ITN had one main 708-bed hub hospital and 8 smaller affiliated hospitals varying in size from 72 to 359 beds.

Ethics

Ethical approval was received from the Ethics Board Chairperson of Galway University Hospital (ref CA 2241). All participants provided written informed consent prior to completion of the survey.

Survey instruments

Two annonymous survey instruments were developed (see Underlying data16). In survey A participants were asked to indicate their level of entrustability in each of the seven EPAs in the EPA framework for Irish interns4. For EPA 3 ‘perform essential procedural skills’, participants were asked to indicate their level of entrustability with which they perform the 12 associated procedural skills (see Table 1). The participants provided an entrustability rating from 1 (observation but no execution, even with direct supervision) to 4 (supervision at a distance and/or post hoc). Level 5 was not included as this is level of supervision is not carried out by the interns. Participants were also asked to provide their sex, age, and whether they were a graduate of an Irish or non-Irish medical school. A self-generated identification code was also included (birth date, middle initial, number of older siblings) to track participation. Survey B is the same as Survey A except that the participants were also asked if they perform the EPA/clinical procedure: every shift, every two or three shifts, once a week, less than once a week, or not performed during this rotation.

Procedure

Interns from one ITN (n=172) were asked to complete Survey A immediately prior to starting internship in May 2020 (Time 1). Interns from the same ITN were asked to complete Survey B in August 2020 (Time 2), November 2020 (Time 3), and May 2021 (Time 4). A link to the online questionnaire was sent by email from the intern coordinator, with a reminder a week later, and a final reminder two weeks later. The participants were also given the opportunity to enter into a draw for an Apple© iPad mini at Times 3 and 4.

Analysis

The analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS version 22. The data sets of responses for each of the four times the surveys were distributed are available as in the Underlying data16. No adjustments were made for missing data.

Results

Participants

Table 2 provides and overview of the participants on each of the occasions that the survey was completed. A total of 0.6% of the data was missing.

Table 3 shows the median level of self-reported entrustability for each of the six EPAs and the 12 procedural skills in EPA 3. Table 3 also shows the percentage of participants whose self-reported level of entrustability was level 3 (execution with reactive supervision, i.e., on request and quickly available), or level 4 (supervision at a distance and/or post hoc). This is an important distinction as this means the intern does not believe they require direct supervision in performing these skills.

Table 2. Participant characteristics (percentages in brackets).

Time 1Time 2Time 3Time 4
Responses (n=172)126 (73.3)91 (52.9)58 (33.7)44 (25.6)
Sex
  Female
  Male

72 (57.1)
54 (42.9)

53 (58.2)
38 (41.8)

36 (62.1)
22 (37.9)

27 (61.4)
17 (38.6)
Age
  18-24 years
  25-34 years
  >34 years

65 (51.6)
57 (45.2)
4 (3.2)

43 (47.3)
46 (50.5)
2 (2.2)

24 (41.4)
32 (55.2)
2 (34.4)

12 (27.3)
29 (65.9)
3 (6.8)
Graduate
  Irish medical school
  Non-Irish medical school

123 (98.4)
3 (1.6)

90 (98.8)
1 (1.1)

57 (98.3)
1 (1.7)

44 (100)
0 (0)

Table 3. Summary data on self-reported entrustability at the four time points.

EPAsMedian (IR)% level 3 or 4 entrustability
Time 1Time 2Time 3Time 4Time 1Time 2Time 3Time 4
EPA 1: Clerk a patient2 (1)4 (1)4 (1)4 (1)46.085.689.793.1
EPA 2: Request and interpret basic investigations 3 (1)4 (1)4 (1)4 (0)57.992.398.397.7
EPA 3: Perform essential procedural skills
    1.    Hand hygiene4 (0)4 (1)4 (0)4 (0)96.098.9100100
    2.    Venepuncture3 (1.75)4 (0)4 (0)4 (0)75.497.8100100
    3.    Peripheral intravenous cannulation3 (1)4 (0)4 (0)4 (0)58.797.8100100
    4.    Blood cultures from a peripheral vein2 (1)4 (0)4 (0)4 (0)48.497.8100100
    5.    Arterial blood gas sampling2 (0)4 (1)4 (1)4 (0)23.078.094.897.7
    6.    Electrocardiogram 3 (2)4 (0)4 (0)4 (0)72.295.6100100
    7.    Nasogastric tube insertion2 (0)3 (2)4 (1)4 (0)17.568.987.7100
    8.    Urinary catheter insertion2 (1)4 (1)4 (0)4 (0)11.981.396.6100
    9.    Preparation, reconstitution, dilution &
administration of IV drugs
2 (1)3 (1)4 (1)4 (2)16.741.855.272.7
   10. Blood sampling & blood cultures from central line
& tunnelled line
3 (1)3 (2)4 (1)4 (0)11.168.582.897.7
   11. Sterile field set up3 (1)4 (0.5)4 (1)4 (0)54.897.898.2100
   12. Sterile glove application3(1)4 (0)4 (0)4 (0)81.698.9100100
EPA 4: Manage the work of in-patient care3 (1)4 (0.5)4 (0)4 (1)56.396.698.3100
EPA 5: Prescribe & monitor drugs and fluid3 (1)4 (1)4 (1)4 (0)52.095.398.297.6
EPA 6: Recognise and manage the acutely unwell patient2 (1)3 (1)3 (1)4 (0)46.890.794.8100
EPA 7: Handover & discharge2 (1)4 (1)4 (1)4 (0)45.297.6100100

Table 4 shows the percentage of respondents who reported that they perform the six EPAs and the 12 clinical skills in EPA 3 at least once a week during the three time points at which they were working in the hospital.

Table 4. Percentage reporting that they perform the EPA and 12 clinical procedures at least once a week at Time 2, 3, and 4.

EPAsTime 2Time 3Time 4
EPA 1: Clerk a patient51.162.163.6
EPA 2: Request and interpret basic investigations 97.8100100
EPA 3: Perform essential procedural skills
    1.    Hand hygiene98.9100100
    2.    Venepuncture97.898.397.7
    3.    Peripheral intravenous cannulation98.910095.5
    4.    Blood cultures from a peripheral vein65.970.788.6
    5.    Arterial blood gas sampling28.641.456.8
    6.    Electrocardiogram 60.475.981.8
    7.    Nasogastric tube insertion7.76.929.5
    8.    Urinary catheter insertion14.319.031.8
    9.    Preparation, reconstitution, dilution & administration of IV drugs13.58.611.4
    10.  Blood sampling & blood cultures from central line & tunnelled line13.312.125.0
    11. Sterile field set up36.737.931.8
    12. Sterile glove application52.244.850.0
EPA 4: Manage the work of in-patient care97.796.6100
EPA 5: Prescribe & monitor drugs and fluid 97.710095.2
EPA 6: Recognise and manage the acutely unwell patient 77.974.188.1
EPA 7: Handover & discharge 94.196.697.6

The Spearman’s Rho correlation between self-reported entrustability and frequency of performance for all of the EPAs across all three time points (expect for EPA2) was 0.33 (p<.01). The Spearman’s Rho correlation between self-reported entrustability and frequency of performance for the 12 clinical skills across all three time points was 0.42 (p<.01). These can be considered to be moderate correlations.

Discussion

Medical training has traditionally comprised a time-based apprenticeship model both in the Republic of Ireland as well as internationally. As such, doctors advance to the next stages of training based on time, and not competence. EPAs have been promoted as an approach to support competency-based assessments4–6,9,10 and improve patient safety. The purpose of our study was to assess self-reported level of entrustment within, and frequency of performance of, the seven Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) comprising the EPA framework for interns in Ireland in order to identify when, and if, interns are able to, execute them without the need for direct supervision.

Prior to starting internship, the respondents reported a need for direct supervision to carry out many of the EPAs, and the more advanced procedures in EPA 3. This finding is consistent with other studies that have found that high percentages of newly graduated medical students report feeling under-prepared to begin working in a hospital11, and variability in their confidence to perform specific clinical skills1. A national survey of junior doctors in Ireland found that only 51% believed that medical school prepared them well for their intern year17. However, even after only three months of clinical practice there was a large change in in the self-reported level of entrustability, with a much greater proportion of interns reporting that they could complete many of the EPAs and clinical skills with either reactive supervision, or supervision at a distance as compared to the baseline assessment. This is certainly a positive finding, and suggests that internship is effective in increasing the level of competence of junior doctors. However, there may be a cost to patients in terms of compromising safety, the efficiency of the health service (e.g. the need to repeat procedures18, ordering unnecessary tests19) as well as to the interns themselves (e.g. stress or burnout13) in terms of this largely on-the-job approach to skill development. These costs are worth considering, and may help to justify the resources required to establish a competency-based approach to education and training. There is also need to consider what level of entrustability is required for newly graduated medical students as this has implications for by the training and supervision required by interns. This is an issue that has been addressed by the UK General Medical Council for practical procedures and skills20. It is suggested that this should also be considered within the broader context of the EPAs.

The interns reported carrying out the majority of the EPAs and clinical procedures at least once a week, with an increase in the frequency of performance during the year. It could be postulated that as interns complete the EPAs and clinical procedures more, they then become more confident in their ability- as indicated by the moderate correlation between self-reported entrustability and frequency of performance. However, there were five clinical procedures (nasogastric tube insertion; urinary catheter insertion; preparation, reconstitution, dilution and administration of IV drugs; blood sampling and blood cultures from central line and tunnelled line; and sterile field set-up) that, even by the third time point, the majority of the interns had not carried out in the past week. This information should be considered in terms of how many repetitions are required to become competent in a procedure. For example, it was found that it took junior doctors between 19 and 146 repetitions of peripheral venous cannulation procedures in the clinical environment to reach an acceptable level of performance21. Therefore, despite their confidence in their abilities, it may be that the intern are not receiving sufficient exposure to these clinical procedures in order to reach competency. Particularly for procedures for which the interns receive limited exposure, there is a need to give additional opportunities for them to practice and receive feedback on these skills. It is suggested that simulation-based education provides a mechanism for interns to become competent, in a safe learning environment.

Recommendations

The Irish intern year EPAs provide a framework for medical schools to design teaching and assessment to better prepare newly graduated medical students for internship and clinical practice. A higher level of preparedness of medical students at the beginning of internship would have a number of benefits. The newly graduated students could be formally assessed to ensure they are competent to start internship, it would reduce the need for ‘boot camps’and on-the-job learning of these EPAs. Given that most learning occurred during the first three months of training, it is suggested that extra support should be available for interns during this time period. A particular approach used in the ITN that was the subject of our research is a ‘buddy’ intern programme. In this programme, ‘buddy’ interns are recruited from a pool of intern volunteers who have just completed the intern year. The ‘buddy’ interns work alongside the new interns for the first month and provide support and mentoring, skills training, and work night shifts. There was strong support for this programme from the participating newly graduated doctors22.

There is a need to assess entrustability, beyond self-report. It has been suggested that there is general tendency for doctors to be over confident in their ability to complete particular clinical tasks23. Therefore, we cannot draw conclusions about actual levels of entrustability as the interns’ competence has not been formally assessed. Such assessment will allow the identification of those interns that are not able to perform these without direct supervision, and provide them with extra training required. Approaches to the assessment of EPAs that have particular potential include the use of simulation and portfolios6,24,25. However, there is a need for research on how such tools can be used- to include a consideration of the feasibility of these assessments being carried out by busy clinical supervisors10.

Limitations

The main limitation of the research reported in this assignment is that the data is based on self-report. As discussed above, there may be a tendency for the interns to be over-confident in the ability to execute the EPAs. So, these findings should be considered with that in mind. There are also a number of other limitations that should be acknowledged. The research was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the findings may not be the same as if the data was collected during a more typical intern training year. The response rate although high at baseline, dropped considerable on each occasion that the survey was distributed- corresponding with a time in which there was a COVID-19 surge in Ireland. Finally, only respondents from one Irish ITN were surveyed.

Conclusion

After three months of clinical practice, almost all of the interns believed they could execute all of the EPAs in the Irish intern EPA framework without the need for direct supervision. This is certainly a positive finding. However, consideration should be given as to how to better prepare medical students to execute these EPAs as an integral part of their undergraduate training, how the interns can be better supported during the first quarter of internship, and there is an urgent need to carry out formal assessments of entrustability, rather than relying on self-report. Adopting this type of competency based approach will benefit the interns (as they will know they have the competencies required to perform the job), their supervisors (who know they can trust the interns), and most importantly their patients- the main beneficiaries of well-trained interns.

Data availability

Underlying data

Zenodo: An evaluation of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.582563816.

This project contains the following underlying data:

  • â–¡ Survey responses time 1: EPA survey time 1.sav

  • â–¡ Survey responses time 2: EPA survey time 2.sav

  • â–¡ Survey responses time 3: EPA survey time 3.sav

  • â–¡ Survey responses time 4: EPA survey time 4.sav

Extended data

Zenodo: An evaluation of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5825638.

This project contains the following extended data:

  • â–¡ Survey A: Questionnaire time 1.docx

  • â–¡ Survey B: Questionnaire time 2–4.docx

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 20 Jan 2022
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
VIEWS
254
 
downloads
26
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
O'Connor P, Lydon S, Mongan O and Byrne D. Longitudinal survey of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:9 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13487.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 20 Jan 2022
Views
3
Cite
Reviewer Report 12 Apr 2022
Christoph S. Burkhart, Kantonsspital Graubunden, Chur, Switzerland 
Approved
VIEWS 3
The authors analysed self-reported levels of entrustment in interns in their first year of clinical practice in one national intern training network in Ireland. Interns were asked to self-assess their performance in the seven Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) in the ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Burkhart CS. Reviewer Report For: Longitudinal survey of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:9 (https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14708.r31756)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 19 Apr 2022
    Paul Paul, General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland
    19 Apr 2022
    Author Response
    We certainly agree with the reviewer that a large limitation of this study is the reliance on self-report. We are currently building on the self-report data and undertaking a study ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 19 Apr 2022
    Paul Paul, General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland
    19 Apr 2022
    Author Response
    We certainly agree with the reviewer that a large limitation of this study is the reliance on self-report. We are currently building on the self-report data and undertaking a study ... Continue reading
Views
8
Cite
Reviewer Report 08 Feb 2022
Terri P. McVeigh, Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK 
Approved
VIEWS 8
The authors have outlined a study in which interns in a single Irish intern training network were surveyed at 4 time points over the course of their intern year and asked to self-assess their entrustability in each of the 7 ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
McVeigh TP. Reviewer Report For: Longitudinal survey of self-reported level of entrustment across the first year of clinical practice [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:9 (https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14708.r31303)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 19 Apr 2022
    Paul Paul, General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland
    19 Apr 2022
    Author Response
    The high level of attrition across the time points was disappointing, and we agree limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the findings. The various COVID-19 pandemic waves likely ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 19 Apr 2022
    Paul Paul, General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland
    19 Apr 2022
    Author Response
    The high level of attrition across the time points was disappointing, and we agree limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the findings. The various COVID-19 pandemic waves likely ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 20 Jan 2022
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Are you a HRB-funded researcher?

Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all HRB grantholders or people working on a HRB-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from HRB Open Research.

You must provide your first name
You must provide your last name
You must provide a valid email address
You must provide an institution.

Thank you!

We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to HRB Open Research

Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.