Cargando…

Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors

BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessment (WBA), foundational to competency-based medical education, relies on preceptors providing feedback to residents. Preceptors however get little timely, formative, specific, actionable feedback on the effectiveness of that feedback. Our study aimed to identify us...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Griffiths, Jane, Schultz, Karen, Han, Han, Dalgarno, Nancy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Canadian Medical Education Journal 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7931483/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33680229
http://dx.doi.org/10.36834/cmej.69913
_version_ 1783660303375925248
author Griffiths, Jane
Schultz, Karen
Han, Han
Dalgarno, Nancy
author_facet Griffiths, Jane
Schultz, Karen
Han, Han
Dalgarno, Nancy
author_sort Griffiths, Jane
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessment (WBA), foundational to competency-based medical education, relies on preceptors providing feedback to residents. Preceptors however get little timely, formative, specific, actionable feedback on the effectiveness of that feedback. Our study aimed to identify useful qualities of feedback for family medicine residents and to inform improving feedback-giving skills for preceptors in PGME training program. METHODS: This study employed a two-phase exploratory design. Phase 1 collected qualitative data from preceptor feedback given to residents through Field Notes (FNs) and quantitative data from residents who provided feedback to preceptor about the quality of the feedback given. Phase 2 employed focus groups to explore ways in which residents are willing to provide preceptors with constructive feedback about the quality of the feedback they receive. Descriptive statistics and a thematic approach were used for data analysis. FINDINGS: We collected 22 FNs identified by residents as being impactful to their learning; analysis of these FNs resulted in five themes. Functionality was then added to the electronic FNs allowing residents to indicate impactful feedback with a “Thumbs Up” icon. Over one year, 895 out of 8,496 FNs (11%) had a “Thumbs up” added, divided into reasons of: confirmation of learning (28.6%), practice improvement (21.2%), new learning (18.8%), motivation (17.7%), and evoking reflection (13.7%). Two focus groups (12 residents, convenience sampling) explored residents’ perception of constructive feedback and willingness to also provide constructive feedback to preceptors. CONCLUSION: Adding constructive feedback to existing positive feedback choices will provide preceptors with holistic information about the impact of their feedback on learners, which, in turn, should allow them to provide more effective feedback to learners. However, power differential, relationship impact, and institutional support were concerns for residents that would need to be addressed for this to be optimally operationalized.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7931483
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Canadian Medical Education Journal
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79314832021-03-06 Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors Griffiths, Jane Schultz, Karen Han, Han Dalgarno, Nancy Can Med Educ J Major Contributions BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessment (WBA), foundational to competency-based medical education, relies on preceptors providing feedback to residents. Preceptors however get little timely, formative, specific, actionable feedback on the effectiveness of that feedback. Our study aimed to identify useful qualities of feedback for family medicine residents and to inform improving feedback-giving skills for preceptors in PGME training program. METHODS: This study employed a two-phase exploratory design. Phase 1 collected qualitative data from preceptor feedback given to residents through Field Notes (FNs) and quantitative data from residents who provided feedback to preceptor about the quality of the feedback given. Phase 2 employed focus groups to explore ways in which residents are willing to provide preceptors with constructive feedback about the quality of the feedback they receive. Descriptive statistics and a thematic approach were used for data analysis. FINDINGS: We collected 22 FNs identified by residents as being impactful to their learning; analysis of these FNs resulted in five themes. Functionality was then added to the electronic FNs allowing residents to indicate impactful feedback with a “Thumbs Up” icon. Over one year, 895 out of 8,496 FNs (11%) had a “Thumbs up” added, divided into reasons of: confirmation of learning (28.6%), practice improvement (21.2%), new learning (18.8%), motivation (17.7%), and evoking reflection (13.7%). Two focus groups (12 residents, convenience sampling) explored residents’ perception of constructive feedback and willingness to also provide constructive feedback to preceptors. CONCLUSION: Adding constructive feedback to existing positive feedback choices will provide preceptors with holistic information about the impact of their feedback on learners, which, in turn, should allow them to provide more effective feedback to learners. However, power differential, relationship impact, and institutional support were concerns for residents that would need to be addressed for this to be optimally operationalized. Canadian Medical Education Journal 2021-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7931483/ /pubmed/33680229 http://dx.doi.org/10.36834/cmej.69913 Text en © 2021 Griffiths, Schultz, Han, Dalgarno; licensee Synergies Partners https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an Open Journal Systems article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is cited.
spellingShingle Major Contributions
Griffiths, Jane
Schultz, Karen
Han, Han
Dalgarno, Nancy
Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title_full Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title_fullStr Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title_full_unstemmed Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title_short Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
title_sort feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors
topic Major Contributions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7931483/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33680229
http://dx.doi.org/10.36834/cmej.69913
work_keys_str_mv AT griffithsjane feedbackonfeedbackatwowaystreetbetweenresidentsandpreceptors
AT schultzkaren feedbackonfeedbackatwowaystreetbetweenresidentsandpreceptors
AT hanhan feedbackonfeedbackatwowaystreetbetweenresidentsandpreceptors
AT dalgarnonancy feedbackonfeedbackatwowaystreetbetweenresidentsandpreceptors