Cargando…

1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson

BACKGROUND: Trainees may not always be comfortable providing frank feedback or constructive criticism to their Program Director (PD) due to fears of negative repercussions. PDs likewise may lack the means to obtain high quality feedback from trainees, particularly among smaller training programs, e....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riedel, David J, Malek, Rana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7777024/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1299
_version_ 1783630810661781504
author Riedel, David J
Malek, Rana
author_facet Riedel, David J
Malek, Rana
author_sort Riedel, David J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Trainees may not always be comfortable providing frank feedback or constructive criticism to their Program Director (PD) due to fears of negative repercussions. PDs likewise may lack the means to obtain high quality feedback from trainees, particularly among smaller training programs, e.g. fellowships. An ombudsperson is defined as an independent appointee whose task is to investigate and attempt to resolve complaints and problems. METHODS: The PDs from Infectious Disease (ID) and Endocrinology fellowships partnered to meet with fellows from the opposite program. Meetings were held with fellows in December and June of the academic year. Each PD started their meeting with 2 questions on a 1-10 scale: How do you rate the fellowship program? How do you rate the job the PD and program leadership are doing? Additional questions covered the fellow evaluation process, faculty feedback, education vs. service balance, and gaps in training. Additional time was allotted for fellow-raised concerns. Meeting notes were summarized anonymously and returned to the PD of the other program. Fellows were asked to complete a brief questionnaire about their experience. RESULTS: A total of 15 fellows completed the survey (6 Endocrinology, 9 ID; Table). All 15 fellows agreed that the goal of the ombudsperson review meeting (i.e. to address fellow concerns in a more confidential setting) was achieved and were comfortable sharing concerns and feedback to the ombudsperson. The majority of fellows (53%) was more comfortable sharing concerns regarding the fellowship to the ombudsperson than directly to the PD. Thirteen (87%) agreed that concerns raised during the first ombudsperson meeting were addressed by the Program in subsequent months. All fellows (100%) found it helpful that the ombudsperson was another PD and recommended that the ombudsperson review meetings should continue in the fellowship. Table. Characteristics of participants and outcomes of questions about fellowship ombudsperson program [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: The fellowship PD ombudsperson meeting is a novel means for soliciting constructive feedback from trainees at small training programs. Fellows were comfortable with the ombudsperson arrangement, felt the meetings achieved their goal, and recommended that the meetings continue in the future. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7777024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77770242021-01-07 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson Riedel, David J Malek, Rana Open Forum Infect Dis Poster Abstracts BACKGROUND: Trainees may not always be comfortable providing frank feedback or constructive criticism to their Program Director (PD) due to fears of negative repercussions. PDs likewise may lack the means to obtain high quality feedback from trainees, particularly among smaller training programs, e.g. fellowships. An ombudsperson is defined as an independent appointee whose task is to investigate and attempt to resolve complaints and problems. METHODS: The PDs from Infectious Disease (ID) and Endocrinology fellowships partnered to meet with fellows from the opposite program. Meetings were held with fellows in December and June of the academic year. Each PD started their meeting with 2 questions on a 1-10 scale: How do you rate the fellowship program? How do you rate the job the PD and program leadership are doing? Additional questions covered the fellow evaluation process, faculty feedback, education vs. service balance, and gaps in training. Additional time was allotted for fellow-raised concerns. Meeting notes were summarized anonymously and returned to the PD of the other program. Fellows were asked to complete a brief questionnaire about their experience. RESULTS: A total of 15 fellows completed the survey (6 Endocrinology, 9 ID; Table). All 15 fellows agreed that the goal of the ombudsperson review meeting (i.e. to address fellow concerns in a more confidential setting) was achieved and were comfortable sharing concerns and feedback to the ombudsperson. The majority of fellows (53%) was more comfortable sharing concerns regarding the fellowship to the ombudsperson than directly to the PD. Thirteen (87%) agreed that concerns raised during the first ombudsperson meeting were addressed by the Program in subsequent months. All fellows (100%) found it helpful that the ombudsperson was another PD and recommended that the ombudsperson review meetings should continue in the fellowship. Table. Characteristics of participants and outcomes of questions about fellowship ombudsperson program [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: The fellowship PD ombudsperson meeting is a novel means for soliciting constructive feedback from trainees at small training programs. Fellows were comfortable with the ombudsperson arrangement, felt the meetings achieved their goal, and recommended that the meetings continue in the future. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7777024/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1299 Text en © The Author 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Poster Abstracts
Riedel, David J
Malek, Rana
1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title_full 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title_fullStr 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title_full_unstemmed 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title_short 1113. A Novel Means of Acquiring High Quality Feedback for Training Programs –The Program Director Ombudsperson
title_sort 1113. a novel means of acquiring high quality feedback for training programs –the program director ombudsperson
topic Poster Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7777024/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1299
work_keys_str_mv AT riedeldavidj 1113anovelmeansofacquiringhighqualityfeedbackfortrainingprogramstheprogramdirectorombudsperson
AT malekrana 1113anovelmeansofacquiringhighqualityfeedbackfortrainingprogramstheprogramdirectorombudsperson