Cargando…

Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis

Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are requir...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pentzek, Michael, Wilm, Stefan, Gummersbach, Elisabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8675380/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34957327
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518
_version_ 1784615860404486144
author Pentzek, Michael
Wilm, Stefan
Gummersbach, Elisabeth
author_facet Pentzek, Michael
Wilm, Stefan
Gummersbach, Elisabeth
author_sort Pentzek, Michael
collection PubMed
description Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are required. The question of the present study is whether the student evaluation of an attachment in previously poorly evaluated practices improves after teaching physicians have received feedback from a colleague. Methods: Students in study years 1, 2, 3 and 5 evaluated their experiences in general practice attachments with two 4-point items (professional competence and recommendation for other students). Particularly poorly evaluated teaching practices were identified. A practising physician with experience in teaching and research conducted a personal feedback of the evaluation results with these (peer feedback), mainly in the form of individual discussions in the practice (peer visit). After this intervention, further attachments took place in these practices. The influence of the intervention (pre/post) on student evaluations was calculated in generalised estimating equations (cluster variable practice). Results: Of 264 teaching practices, 83 had a suboptimal rating. Of these, 27 practices with particularly negative ratings were selected for the intervention, of which 24 got the intervention so far. There were no post-evaluations for 5 of these practices, so that data from 19 practices (n=9 male teaching physicians, n=10 female teaching physicians) were included in the present evaluation. The evaluations of these practices were significantly more positive after the intervention (by n=78 students) than before (by n=82 students): odds ratio 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.31; p<.001). Conclusion: The results suggest that university institutes of general practice can improve student evaluation of their teaching practices via individual collegial feedback.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8675380
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86753802021-12-23 Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis Pentzek, Michael Wilm, Stefan Gummersbach, Elisabeth GMS J Med Educ Article Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are required. The question of the present study is whether the student evaluation of an attachment in previously poorly evaluated practices improves after teaching physicians have received feedback from a colleague. Methods: Students in study years 1, 2, 3 and 5 evaluated their experiences in general practice attachments with two 4-point items (professional competence and recommendation for other students). Particularly poorly evaluated teaching practices were identified. A practising physician with experience in teaching and research conducted a personal feedback of the evaluation results with these (peer feedback), mainly in the form of individual discussions in the practice (peer visit). After this intervention, further attachments took place in these practices. The influence of the intervention (pre/post) on student evaluations was calculated in generalised estimating equations (cluster variable practice). Results: Of 264 teaching practices, 83 had a suboptimal rating. Of these, 27 practices with particularly negative ratings were selected for the intervention, of which 24 got the intervention so far. There were no post-evaluations for 5 of these practices, so that data from 19 practices (n=9 male teaching physicians, n=10 female teaching physicians) were included in the present evaluation. The evaluations of these practices were significantly more positive after the intervention (by n=78 students) than before (by n=82 students): odds ratio 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.31; p<.001). Conclusion: The results suggest that university institutes of general practice can improve student evaluation of their teaching practices via individual collegial feedback. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2021-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8675380/ /pubmed/34957327 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518 Text en Copyright © 2021 Pentzek et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Pentzek, Michael
Wilm, Stefan
Gummersbach, Elisabeth
Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title_full Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title_fullStr Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title_full_unstemmed Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title_short Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
title_sort does peer feedback for teaching gps improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? a pre-post analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8675380/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34957327
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518
work_keys_str_mv AT pentzekmichael doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis
AT wilmstefan doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis
AT gummersbachelisabeth doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis