Cargando…

Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey

BACKGROUND: Professionalism is hard to quantify but essential in medical practice. We present a survey tool for ophthalmologists that assessed professionalism using case-based scenarios in central Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Ophthalmologists (resident, fellows and consultants) participated in a web-based...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alkahtani, Eman, Assiri, Abdullah, Alrashaed, Saba, Alharbi, Mosa, Almotowa, Saeed, Khandekar, Rajiv, Edward, Deepak P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7236953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32429926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02071-y
_version_ 1783536238614020096
author Alkahtani, Eman
Assiri, Abdullah
Alrashaed, Saba
Alharbi, Mosa
Almotowa, Saeed
Khandekar, Rajiv
Edward, Deepak P.
author_facet Alkahtani, Eman
Assiri, Abdullah
Alrashaed, Saba
Alharbi, Mosa
Almotowa, Saeed
Khandekar, Rajiv
Edward, Deepak P.
author_sort Alkahtani, Eman
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Professionalism is hard to quantify but essential in medical practice. We present a survey tool for ophthalmologists that assessed professionalism using case-based scenarios in central Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Ophthalmologists (resident, fellows and consultants) participated in a web-based survey in 2015. Out of 44 attributes related to professionalism, experts selected 32 attributes with validity indices of ≥0.80. To evaluate these attributes, 51 scenario-based questions were developed and included in the survey. For each attribute, participants were given choices of close ended responses: unacceptable (1), probably unacceptable (2), acceptable (3), probably acceptable (4). The attribute score was compared to the gold standard (responses of an expert group). An attribute score was generated and compared among subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 155 ophthalmologists, responses of 147 ophthalmologists who completed more than 50% of questions were reviewed. Their mean attribute score was 84.1 ± 10.1 (Median 87.1; 25% quartile 78.1; minimum 50; and maximum 100). The variation in attribute score among consultants, fellows and resident ophthalmologists was significant (P = 0.008). The variation of attribute score by groups of attributes was also significant (P < 0.05). The score for ‘Personal characteristics’ was on a lower scale compared to that of other attribute groups. The variation in the scores for attribute groups; ‘Personal characteristics attribute’ group (p < 0.01) and ‘Workplace practices & relationship’ group (P = 0.03) for consultants, fellows and residents were significant. CONCLUSIONS: Professionalism among ophthalmologists and those in training was high and influenced by years of experience. The survey tool appeared to show differences in responses to specific professional attribute groups between trainees and consultants. Additional studies with a larger sample size might be helpful in validating the survey as a tool to be used to assess professionalism in graduate medical education in ophthalmology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7236953
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72369532020-05-27 Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey Alkahtani, Eman Assiri, Abdullah Alrashaed, Saba Alharbi, Mosa Almotowa, Saeed Khandekar, Rajiv Edward, Deepak P. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Professionalism is hard to quantify but essential in medical practice. We present a survey tool for ophthalmologists that assessed professionalism using case-based scenarios in central Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Ophthalmologists (resident, fellows and consultants) participated in a web-based survey in 2015. Out of 44 attributes related to professionalism, experts selected 32 attributes with validity indices of ≥0.80. To evaluate these attributes, 51 scenario-based questions were developed and included in the survey. For each attribute, participants were given choices of close ended responses: unacceptable (1), probably unacceptable (2), acceptable (3), probably acceptable (4). The attribute score was compared to the gold standard (responses of an expert group). An attribute score was generated and compared among subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 155 ophthalmologists, responses of 147 ophthalmologists who completed more than 50% of questions were reviewed. Their mean attribute score was 84.1 ± 10.1 (Median 87.1; 25% quartile 78.1; minimum 50; and maximum 100). The variation in attribute score among consultants, fellows and resident ophthalmologists was significant (P = 0.008). The variation of attribute score by groups of attributes was also significant (P < 0.05). The score for ‘Personal characteristics’ was on a lower scale compared to that of other attribute groups. The variation in the scores for attribute groups; ‘Personal characteristics attribute’ group (p < 0.01) and ‘Workplace practices & relationship’ group (P = 0.03) for consultants, fellows and residents were significant. CONCLUSIONS: Professionalism among ophthalmologists and those in training was high and influenced by years of experience. The survey tool appeared to show differences in responses to specific professional attribute groups between trainees and consultants. Additional studies with a larger sample size might be helpful in validating the survey as a tool to be used to assess professionalism in graduate medical education in ophthalmology. BioMed Central 2020-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7236953/ /pubmed/32429926 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02071-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis 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.
spellingShingle Research Article
Alkahtani, Eman
Assiri, Abdullah
Alrashaed, Saba
Alharbi, Mosa
Almotowa, Saeed
Khandekar, Rajiv
Edward, Deepak P.
Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title_full Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title_fullStr Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title_full_unstemmed Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title_short Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
title_sort medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7236953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32429926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02071-y
work_keys_str_mv AT alkahtanieman medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT assiriabdullah medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT alrashaedsaba medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT alharbimosa medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT almotowasaeed medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT khandekarrajiv medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey
AT edwarddeepakp medicalprofessionalisminophthalmologydesignandtestingofascenariobasedsurvey