Literature DB >> 21445580

Prospective controlled assessment of impact of feedback on gastroenterology trainees in outpatient practice.

Gavin C Harewood1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies have demonstrated the value of systematic feedback in enhancing endoscopic procedure performance. It remains unknown whether feedback may play a role in modifying physician performance in outpatient practice. This study aimed to assess the impact of systematic feedback on duration of office visits of gastroenterology (GI) trainees in outpatient practice.
METHODS: Patients attending a GI outpatient department in an academic medical center were prospectively followed over 4 months. The duration of office visits for consecutive patients seen by five GI fellows of similar experience level were recorded for 2 months (pre-feedback); confidential feedback was then provided to each fellow on a weekly basis for 2 months detailing their individual consultation times and the comparative, anonymous times of the other fellows (post-feedback).
RESULTS: Over the course of the study, 1,647 outpatients were seen by five GI fellows. Pre-feedback consultation durations differed significantly with one fellow taking 2.5 times longer than their colleague. Following feedback, times shortened significantly for all fellows, with the greatest impact observed in those trainees taking longer at baseline. There were no significant differences in satisfaction levels among patients seen by each trainee.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a wide disparity in the consultation times among GI fellows. Systematic feedback shortened times among all trainees and enhanced uniformity by having the greatest impact among those fellows taking longer at baseline. Routine provision of feedback may be valuable in enhancing uniformity of outpatient practice although clinicians should ensure that shortening consultation visits does not compromise quality of patient care. Future larger studies of feedback in this setting will be enhanced by incorporating objective measures of quality of care and patient satisfaction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21445580     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-011-1673-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  10 in total

1.  Hospital discharges. Creating bed room.

Authors:  G Pascoe
Journal:  Health Serv J       Date:  2001-05-03

2.  Prospective assessment of the impact of feedback on colonoscopy performance.

Authors:  G C Harewood; B T Petersen; B J Ott
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2006-07-15       Impact factor: 8.171

3.  Managing demand for secondary care services: the changing context.

Authors:  N Edwards; M Hensher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-07-11

4.  The outpatient experience: results of a patient feedback survey.

Authors:  K McKinnon; P D Crofts; R Edwards; P D Campion; R H Edwards
Journal:  Int J Health Care Qual Assur Inc Leadersh Health Serv       Date:  1998

5.  Variation in detection of adenomas and polyps by colonoscopy and change over time with a performance improvement program.

Authors:  Aasma Shaukat; Cristina Oancea; John H Bond; Timothy R Church; John I Allen
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 11.382

6.  Patient attitude towards waiting in an outpatient clinic and its applications.

Authors:  X M Huang
Journal:  Health Serv Manage Res       Date:  1994-02

7.  A discharge planning patient information system.

Authors:  L Gray
Journal:  Aust Health Rev       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.990

8.  Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Robert L Barclay; Joseph J Vicari; Andrea S Doughty; John F Johanson; Roger L Greenlaw
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-12-14       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Using a multifaceted approach to improve the follow-up of positive fecal occult blood test results.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Himabindu Kadiyala; Gayathri Bhagwath; Anila Shethia; Hashem El-Serag; Annette Walder; Maria E Velez; Laura A Petersen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 10.864

10.  A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?

Authors:  C J A Bowles; R Leicester; C Romaya; E Swarbrick; C B Williams; O Epstein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 23.059

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.