Literature DB >> 15883137

Use of SPRAT for peer review of paediatricians in training.

Julian C Archer1, John Norcini, Helena A Davies.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multisource feedback questionnaire, SPRAT (Sheffield peer review assessment tool), is a feasible and reliable assessment method to inform the record of in-training assessment for paediatric senior house officers and specialist registrars.
DESIGN: Trainees' clinical performance was evaluated using SPRAT sent to clinical colleagues of their choosing. Responses were analysed to determine variables that affected ratings and their measurement characteristics.
SETTING: Three tertiary hospitals and five secondary hospitals across a UK deanery. PARTICIPANTS: 112 paediatric senior house officers and middle grades. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 95% confidence intervals for mean ratings; linear and hierarchical regression to explore potential biasing factors; time needed for the process per doctor.
RESULTS: 20 middle grades and 92 senior house officers were assessed using SPRAT to inform their record of in-training assessment; 921/1120 (82%) of their proposed raters completed a SPRAT form. As a group, specialist registrars (mean 5.22, SD 0.34) scored significantly higher (t = - 4.765) than did senior house officers (mean 4.81, SD 0.35) (P < 0.001). The grade of the doctor accounted for 7.6% of the variation in the mean ratings. The hierarchical regression showed that only 3.4% of the variation in the means could be additionally attributed to three main factors (occupation of rater, length of working relationship, and environment in which the relationship took place) when the doctor's grade was controlled for (significant F change < 0.001). 93 (83%) of the doctors in this study would have needed only four raters to achieve a reliable score if the intent was to determine if they were satisfactory. The mean time taken to complete the questionnaire by a rater was six minutes. Just over an hour of administrative time is needed for each doctor.
CONCLUSIONS: SPRAT seems to be a valid way of assessing large numbers of doctors to support quality assurance procedures for training programmes. The feedback from SPRAT can also be used to inform personal development planning and focus quality improvements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15883137      PMCID: PMC558096          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38447.610451.8F

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  10 in total

1.  A pilot study of peer review in residency training.

Authors:  P A Thomas; K A Gebo; D B Hellmann
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: the physician achievement review.

Authors:  W Hall; C Violato; R Lewkonia; J Lockyer; H Fidler; J Toews; P Jennett; M Donoff; D Moores
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-07-13       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Comparison of faculty, peer, self, and nurse assessment of obstetrics and gynecology residents.

Authors:  John D Davis
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Multisource feedback: a method of assessing surgical practice.

Authors:  Claudio Violato; Jocelyn Lockyer; Herta Fidler
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-03-08

5.  The value of patient and peer ratings in recertification.

Authors:  Rebecca S Lipner; Linda L Blank; Brian F Leas; Gregory S Fortna
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  Faculty and the observation of trainees' clinical skills: problems and opportunities.

Authors:  Eric S Holmboe
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.893

7.  Clinical management. Where medicine meets management. On reflection.

Authors:  Julian C Archer; Helena Davies
Journal:  Health Serv J       Date:  2004-04-29

Review 8.  Review of instruments for peer assessment of physicians.

Authors:  Richard Evans; Glyn Elwyn; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-22

9.  Feasibility and psychometric properties of using peers, consulting physicians, co-workers, and patients to assess physicians.

Authors:  C Violato; A Marini; J Toews; J Lockyer; H Fidler
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 6.893

10.  Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance.

Authors:  P G Ramsey; M D Wenrich; J D Carline; T S Inui; E B Larson; J P LoGerfo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-04-07       Impact factor: 56.272

  10 in total
  26 in total

1.  Multisource feedback in the ambulatory setting.

Authors:  Eric J Warm; Daniel Schauer; Brian Revis; James R Boex
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2010-06

2.  Can poorly performing doctors blame their assessment tools?

Authors:  Richard Baker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-05-09

Review 3.  Use of assessment to reinforce patient safety as a habit.

Authors:  R M Galbraith; M C Holtman; S G Clyman
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-12

Review 4.  A critical analysis of mini peer assessment tool (mini-PAT).

Authors:  Aza Abdulla
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool): a well kept secret?

Authors:  Julian Archer
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Transfer of take-home messages in graduate ICU education.

Authors:  Alexandre Lautrette; Carole Schwebel; Didier Gruson; R W Talbot; Jean-François Timsit; Bertrand Souweine
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Use of a multisource feedback tool to develop pharmacists in a postgraduate training program.

Authors:  John Graham Davies; Julienne Ciantar; Barry Jubraj; Ian Peter Bates
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 2.047

8.  Multisource feedback questionnaires in appraisal and for revalidation: a qualitative study in UK general practice.

Authors:  Jacqueline J Hill; Anthea Asprey; Suzanne H Richards; John L Campbell
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Feasibility of implementing a standardized multisource feedback program in the graduate medical education environment.

Authors:  Margaret Richmond; Colleen Canavan; Matthew C Holtman; Peter J Katsufrakis
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2011-12

Review 10.  Using Peer Feedback to Promote Clinical Excellence in Hospital Medicine.

Authors:  Molly A Rosenthal; Bradley A Sharpe; Lawrence A Haber
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.