BACKGROUND: The faculty development community has been challenged to more rigorously assess program impact and move beyond traditional outcomes of knowledge tests and self ratings. PURPOSE: The purpose was to (a) assess our ability to measure supervisors' feedback skills as demonstrated in a clinical setting and (b) compare the results with traditional outcome measures of faculty development interventions. METHODS: A pre-post study design was used. Resident and expert ratings of supervisors' demonstrated feedback skills were compared with traditional outcomes, including a knowledge test and participant self-evaluation. RESULTS: Pre-post knowledge increased significantly (pre = 61%, post = 85%; p < .001) as did participant's self-evaluation scores (pre = 4.13, post = 4.79; p < .001). Participants' self-evaluations were moderately to poorly correlated with resident (pre r = .20, post r = .08) and expert ratings (pre r = .43, post r = -.52). Residents and experts would need to evaluate 110 and 200 participants, respectively, to reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to measure feedback skills in a clinical setting. Although traditional outcome measures show a significant effect, demonstrating change in teaching behaviors used in practice will require larger scale studies than typically undertaken currently.
BACKGROUND: The faculty development community has been challenged to more rigorously assess program impact and move beyond traditional outcomes of knowledge tests and self ratings. PURPOSE: The purpose was to (a) assess our ability to measure supervisors' feedback skills as demonstrated in a clinical setting and (b) compare the results with traditional outcome measures of faculty development interventions. METHODS: A pre-post study design was used. Resident and expert ratings of supervisors' demonstrated feedback skills were compared with traditional outcomes, including a knowledge test and participant self-evaluation. RESULTS: Pre-post knowledge increased significantly (pre = 61%, post = 85%; p < .001) as did participant's self-evaluation scores (pre = 4.13, post = 4.79; p < .001). Participants' self-evaluations were moderately to poorly correlated with resident (pre r = .20, post r = .08) and expert ratings (pre r = .43, post r = -.52). Residents and experts would need to evaluate 110 and 200 participants, respectively, to reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to measure feedback skills in a clinical setting. Although traditional outcome measures show a significant effect, demonstrating change in teaching behaviors used in practice will require larger scale studies than typically undertaken currently.
Authors: Marco Roos; Martina Kadmon; Michael Kirschfink; Eginhard Koch; Jana Jünger; Veronika Strittmatter-Haubold; Thorsten Steiner Journal: Med Educ Online Date: 2014-03-27