Cargando…

Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats

INTRODUCTION: Medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland, have the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients during formative sessions in preparation for clerkships. These sessions are given in two formats: 1) direct observation of an encount...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Junod Perron, Noëlle, Louis-Simonet, Martine, Cerutti, Bernard, Pfarrwaller, Eva, Sommer, Johanna, Nendaz, Mathieu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Co-Action Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5103667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27834170
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.32160
_version_ 1782466634732011520
author Junod Perron, Noëlle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
author_facet Junod Perron, Noëlle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
author_sort Junod Perron, Noëlle
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland, have the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients during formative sessions in preparation for clerkships. These sessions are given in two formats: 1) direct observation of an encounter followed by verbal feedback (direct feedback) and 2) subsequent review of the videotaped encounter by both student and supervisor (video-based feedback). The aim of the study was to evaluate whether content and process of feedback differed between both formats. METHODS: In 2013, all second- and third-year medical students and clinical supervisors involved in formative sessions were asked to take part in the study. A sample of audiotaped feedback sessions involving supervisors who gave feedback in both formats were analyzed (content and process of the feedback) using a 21-item feedback scale. RESULTS: Forty-eight audiotaped feedback sessions involving 12 supervisors were analyzed (2 direct and 2 video-based sessions per supervisor). When adjusted for the length of feedback, there were significant differences in terms of content and process between both formats; the number of communication skills and clinical reasoning items addressed were higher in the video-based format (11.29 vs. 7.71, p=0.002 and 3.71 vs. 2.04, p=0.010, respectively). Supervisors engaged students more actively during the video-based sessions than during direct feedback sessions (self-assessment: 4.00 vs. 3.17, p=0.007; active problem-solving: 3.92 vs. 3.42, p=0.009). Students made similar observations and tended to consider that the video feedback was more useful for improving some clinical skills. CONCLUSION: Video-based feedback facilitates discussion of clinical reasoning, communication, and professionalism issues while at the same time actively engaging students. Different time and conceptual frameworks may explain observed differences. The choice of feedback format should depend on the educational goal.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5103667
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Co-Action Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51036672016-12-05 Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats Junod Perron, Noëlle Louis-Simonet, Martine Cerutti, Bernard Pfarrwaller, Eva Sommer, Johanna Nendaz, Mathieu Med Educ Online Research Article INTRODUCTION: Medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland, have the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients during formative sessions in preparation for clerkships. These sessions are given in two formats: 1) direct observation of an encounter followed by verbal feedback (direct feedback) and 2) subsequent review of the videotaped encounter by both student and supervisor (video-based feedback). The aim of the study was to evaluate whether content and process of feedback differed between both formats. METHODS: In 2013, all second- and third-year medical students and clinical supervisors involved in formative sessions were asked to take part in the study. A sample of audiotaped feedback sessions involving supervisors who gave feedback in both formats were analyzed (content and process of the feedback) using a 21-item feedback scale. RESULTS: Forty-eight audiotaped feedback sessions involving 12 supervisors were analyzed (2 direct and 2 video-based sessions per supervisor). When adjusted for the length of feedback, there were significant differences in terms of content and process between both formats; the number of communication skills and clinical reasoning items addressed were higher in the video-based format (11.29 vs. 7.71, p=0.002 and 3.71 vs. 2.04, p=0.010, respectively). Supervisors engaged students more actively during the video-based sessions than during direct feedback sessions (self-assessment: 4.00 vs. 3.17, p=0.007; active problem-solving: 3.92 vs. 3.42, p=0.009). Students made similar observations and tended to consider that the video feedback was more useful for improving some clinical skills. CONCLUSION: Video-based feedback facilitates discussion of clinical reasoning, communication, and professionalism issues while at the same time actively engaging students. Different time and conceptual frameworks may explain observed differences. The choice of feedback format should depend on the educational goal. Co-Action Publishing 2016-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5103667/ /pubmed/27834170 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.32160 Text en © 2016 Noëlle Junod Perron et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
spellingShingle Research Article
Junod Perron, Noëlle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title_full Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title_fullStr Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title_full_unstemmed Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title_short Feedback in formative OSCEs: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
title_sort feedback in formative osces: comparison between direct observation and video-based formats
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5103667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27834170
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.32160
work_keys_str_mv AT junodperronnoelle feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats
AT louissimonetmartine feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats
AT ceruttibernard feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats
AT pfarrwallereva feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats
AT sommerjohanna feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats
AT nendazmathieu feedbackinformativeoscescomparisonbetweendirectobservationandvideobasedformats