Cargando…

The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile

BACKGROUND: During their pre-clinical years, medical students are given the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients. During these formative objective structured clinical encounters (OSCEs), tutors from various backgrounds give feedback on students’ history taking, physical ex...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Junod Perron, Noelle, Louis-Simonet, Martine, Cerutti, Bernard, Pfarrwaller, Eva, Sommer, Johanna, Nendaz, Mathieu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5111213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27846882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0815-x
_version_ 1782467825071292416
author Junod Perron, Noelle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
author_facet Junod Perron, Noelle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
author_sort Junod Perron, Noelle
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During their pre-clinical years, medical students are given the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients. During these formative objective structured clinical encounters (OSCEs), tutors from various backgrounds give feedback on students’ history taking, physical exam, and communication skills. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the content and process of feedback varied according to the tutors’ profile. METHODS: During 2013, all 2(nd) and 3(rd) year medical students and tutors involved in three formative OSCEs were asked to fill in questionnaires, and their feedback sessions were audiotaped. Tutors were divided into two groups: 1) generalists: primary care, general internist and educationalist physicians 2) specialists involved in the OSCE related to their field of expertise. Outcome measures included the students’ perceptions of feedback quality and utility and objective assessment of feedback quality. RESULTS: Participants included 251 medical students and 38 tutors (22 generalists and 16 specialists). Students self-reported that feedback was useful to improve history taking, physical exam and communication skills. Objective assessment showed that feedback content essentially focused on history taking and physical exam skills, and that elaboration on clinical reasoning or communication/professionalism issues was uncommon. Multivariate analyses showed that generalist tutors used more learner-centered feedback skills than specialist tutors (stimulating student’s self-assessment (p < .001; making the student active in finding solutions, p < .001; checking student’s understanding, p < .001) and elaborated more on communication and professionalism issues (p < 0.001). Specialists reported less training in how to provide feedback than generalists. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that generalist tutors are more learner-centered and pay more attention to communication and professionalism during feedback than specialist tutors. Such differences may be explained by differences in feedback training but also by differences in practice styles and frames of references that should be further explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0815-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5111213
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51112132016-11-21 The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile Junod Perron, Noelle Louis-Simonet, Martine Cerutti, Bernard Pfarrwaller, Eva Sommer, Johanna Nendaz, Mathieu BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: During their pre-clinical years, medical students are given the opportunity to practice clinical skills with simulated patients. During these formative objective structured clinical encounters (OSCEs), tutors from various backgrounds give feedback on students’ history taking, physical exam, and communication skills. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the content and process of feedback varied according to the tutors’ profile. METHODS: During 2013, all 2(nd) and 3(rd) year medical students and tutors involved in three formative OSCEs were asked to fill in questionnaires, and their feedback sessions were audiotaped. Tutors were divided into two groups: 1) generalists: primary care, general internist and educationalist physicians 2) specialists involved in the OSCE related to their field of expertise. Outcome measures included the students’ perceptions of feedback quality and utility and objective assessment of feedback quality. RESULTS: Participants included 251 medical students and 38 tutors (22 generalists and 16 specialists). Students self-reported that feedback was useful to improve history taking, physical exam and communication skills. Objective assessment showed that feedback content essentially focused on history taking and physical exam skills, and that elaboration on clinical reasoning or communication/professionalism issues was uncommon. Multivariate analyses showed that generalist tutors used more learner-centered feedback skills than specialist tutors (stimulating student’s self-assessment (p < .001; making the student active in finding solutions, p < .001; checking student’s understanding, p < .001) and elaborated more on communication and professionalism issues (p < 0.001). Specialists reported less training in how to provide feedback than generalists. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that generalist tutors are more learner-centered and pay more attention to communication and professionalism during feedback than specialist tutors. Such differences may be explained by differences in feedback training but also by differences in practice styles and frames of references that should be further explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0815-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5111213/ /pubmed/27846882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0815-x Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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.
spellingShingle Research Article
Junod Perron, Noelle
Louis-Simonet, Martine
Cerutti, Bernard
Pfarrwaller, Eva
Sommer, Johanna
Nendaz, Mathieu
The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title_full The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title_fullStr The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title_full_unstemmed The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title_short The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors’ profile
title_sort quality of feedback during formative osces depends on the tutors’ profile
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5111213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27846882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0815-x
work_keys_str_mv AT junodperronnoelle thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT louissimonetmartine thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT ceruttibernard thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT pfarrwallereva thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT sommerjohanna thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT nendazmathieu thequalityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT junodperronnoelle qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT louissimonetmartine qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT ceruttibernard qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT pfarrwallereva qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT sommerjohanna qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile
AT nendazmathieu qualityoffeedbackduringformativeoscesdependsonthetutorsprofile