| Faculty staff perceptions of feedback to residents after direct observation of clinical skills. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 22239334 Owner: NLM Status: In-Data-Review |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Medical Education 2012: 46 : 201-215 Context Performance-based workplace assessments are increasingly important in clinical training. Given the inaccuracy of self-assessment, the provision of external feedback to residents about their clinical skills is necessary for the development of expertise. However, little is known about the processes used by faculty members in giving feedback to residents after observing them with patients. This study explores the factors that underpin faculty members' decisions regarding the feedback they give to residents after directly observing them with patients and the factors that influence how feedback is delivered. Methods In 2009, 44 general internal medicine faculty staff responsible for out-patient resident teaching from 16 internal medicine residency programmes watched four videotaped scenarios and two live scenarios of standardised residents (SRs) with standardised patients and rated the SRs using the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) format. Faculty staff also provided feedback to the SRs after the live encounters. After each encounter, faculty staff were individually interviewed using a semi-structured interview. Interviews were videotaped, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory methods. Results Two broad themes were identified in faculty members' descriptions of the feedback process: variability in feedback techniques, and the factors that influence how faculty staff think and feel about delivering feedback. Multiple approaches to feedback delivery were observed. Faculty members' tensions in balancing positive and negative feedback, their own perceived self-efficacy, their perceptions of the resident's insight, receptivity, skill and potential, the faculty member-resident relationship and contextual factors impacted the feedback process. Conclusions The provision of feedback by faculty staff to residents after observing resident-patient interactions is a complex and dynamic process and is influenced by many factors. Understanding these cognitive and affective factors may provide insight into potential new approaches to faculty development to improve faculty staff's feedback skills and the effectiveness of their feedback. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Jennifer R Kogan; Lisa N Conforti; Elizabeth C Bernabeo; Steven J Durning; Karen E Hauer; Eric S Holmboe |
Related Documents
:
|
6109694 - The use of minor tranquilizers with jail inmates. 21318734 - Quiet-eye training for soccer penalty kicks. 1643234 - Learning to count. 21305424 - Role modeling the doctor-patient relationship in the clinical curriculum. 21199084 - Rotating resident didactics in the emergency department: a cross-sectional survey on cu... 12287344 - The tapong clinic: deciding whether to measure discontinuation. |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Medical education Volume: 46 ISSN: 1365-2923 ISO Abbreviation: Med Educ Publication Date: 2012 Feb |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2012-01-13 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 7605655 Medline TA: Med Educ Country: England |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 201-15 Citation Subset: IM |
Copyright Information:
|
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012. |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA American Board of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Learning from clinical work: the roles of learning cues and credibility judgements.
Next Document: What is so difficult about managing clinical reasoning difficulties?