| Literature DB >> 28298712 |
Patrick Bell1, Pascal McKeown2.
Abstract
Preparation of case reports during student attachments has the attraction of reflecting real life clinical practice, but lacks standardisation when used in summative assessment. This study examined the occurrence and nature of feedback after the introduction of a new system of formative case reports in Third Year clinical attachments. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to compare the new system to previous practice. Comparison of questionnaire responses demonstrated more and earlier feedback in the New Third Year, which was likely to be delivered at a meeting rather than as written comment. In the New Third Year, the quality of feedback was better and several markers of high quality feedback were rated more highly. There was no difference, however, in students' confidence in their ability to assess patients. The qualitative data from the New Third Year documented much excellent feedback but also examples of poor practice as well as inconsistency of advice. In conclusion, a relatively simple intervention effected radical changes to feedback practice and attitudes, although it is not known if the clinical skills of students improved.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28298712 PMCID: PMC5324179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ulster Med J ISSN: 0041-6193
Fig 1Student questionnaire responses about main purpose of case reports.
Student questionnaire responses (in percentages) about arrangements for case reports.
| Purpose of case reports made clear | Easy to gain access to patients | Patient representative of clinical practice | Feedback always occurred | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | |
| Strongly agree | 17.6 | 25.0 | 18.7 | 15.6 | 10.0 | 14.1 | 27.5 | 12.9 |
| Agree | 55.0 | 51.6 | 51.7 | 57.8 | 65.6 | 64.1 | 51.7 | 32.3 |
| Neither agree or disagree | 13.2 | 14.1 | 20.9 | 12.5 | 21.1 | 15.6 | 5.5 | 8.1 |
| Disagree | 14.3 | 7.8 | 7.7 | 12.5 | 3.3 | 6.3 | 12.1 | 32.3 |
| Strongly disagree | 0.0 | 1.6 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.3 | 14.5 |
| χ[ | χ[ | χ[ | χ[ | |||||
Fig 2Student questionnaire responses about main mechanism of feedback.
Fig 3Student questionnaire responses about when feedback took place.
Student questionnaire responses (in percentages) about indicators of high quality feedback.
| Encouraged self reflection | Helped clarify good performance | Encouraged dialogue with teachers | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | |
| Strongly agree | 6.9 | 3.4 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 8.1 | 3.4 |
| Agree | 52.9 | 32.2 | 46.5 | 25.9 | 43.7 | 13.8 |
| Neither agree or disagree | 18.4 | 30.5 | 19.8 | 27.6 | 25.3 | 31.0 |
| Disagree | 18.4 | 18.6 | 22.1 | 24.1 | 20.7 | 36.2 |
| Strongly disagree | 3.5 | 15.3 | 7.0 | 20.7 | 2.3 | 15.5 |
| χ[ | χ[ | χ[ | ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Strongly agree | 5.8 | 1.7 | 8.1 | 3.5 | 8.1 | 3.4 |
| Agree | 40.2 | 34.5 | 50.6 | 26.3 | 56.3 | 37.3 |
| Neither agree or disagree | 28.7 | 32.8 | 20.7 | 42.1 | 20.7 | 30.5 |
| Disagree | 20.7 | 25.9 | 13.8 | 19.3 | 9.2 | 20.3 |
| Strongly disagree | 4.6 | 5.2 | 6.9 | 8.8 | 5.8 | 8.5 |
| χ[ | χ[ | χ[ | ||||
Fig 4Student questionnaire responses about confidence in ability to assess patients.