Véronique Castonguay1, Patrick Lavoie2, Philippe Karazivan3, Judy Morris4, Robert Gagnon5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Research Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Electronic address: veronique.castonguay@umontreal.ca. 2. Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Research Center, Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada. 3. Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Direction of Collaboration and Patient Partnership, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Research Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 5. Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Multisource feedback is a process through which different members of the care team assess and provide feedback on residents' competencies, usually those that are less often addressed by traditional assessment methods (ie, communication, collaboration, and professionalism). Feasibility and reliability of multisource feedback have been addressed in previous research. The present study explores emergency residents' perceptions of multisource feedback provided by teaching physicians, nurses, and patients they have worked with during a rotation in an emergency department (ED). METHODS: A multisource feedback intervention was proposed to residents during 9 months in the ED of a tertiary care university hospital. Residents distributed feedback questionnaires to physicians, nurses, and patients that focused on competencies (collaboration, communication, and professionalism) from the CanMEDS framework. Responses were compiled and reported to participating residents. To assess residents' perceptions of multisource feedback, semistructured group and individual interviews were held 3 months after the intervention. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively, following Miles and Huberman's method for intrasite case analysis. RESULTS: According to residents (n=10), each source (physicians, nurses, and patients) provided relevant comments that differed significantly in their content. Physicians focused primarily on medical expertise; nurses addressed competencies related to leadership, collaboration, and communication; and patients commented on the competencies of professionalism and communication. Residents concluded that obtaining feedback from nurses and patients was acceptable and useful. They reported modifying certain behaviors after receiving the multisource feedback. CONCLUSION: Residents perceived the multisource feedback to be acceptable and useful for the assessment of medical competencies such as communication, collaboration, professionalism, and leadership.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Multisource feedback is a process through which different members of the care team assess and provide feedback on residents' competencies, usually those that are less often addressed by traditional assessment methods (ie, communication, collaboration, and professionalism). Feasibility and reliability of multisource feedback have been addressed in previous research. The present study explores emergency residents' perceptions of multisource feedback provided by teaching physicians, nurses, and patients they have worked with during a rotation in an emergency department (ED). METHODS: A multisource feedback intervention was proposed to residents during 9 months in the ED of a tertiary care university hospital. Residents distributed feedback questionnaires to physicians, nurses, and patients that focused on competencies (collaboration, communication, and professionalism) from the CanMEDS framework. Responses were compiled and reported to participating residents. To assess residents' perceptions of multisource feedback, semistructured group and individual interviews were held 3 months after the intervention. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively, following Miles and Huberman's method for intrasite case analysis. RESULTS: According to residents (n=10), each source (physicians, nurses, and patients) provided relevant comments that differed significantly in their content. Physicians focused primarily on medical expertise; nurses addressed competencies related to leadership, collaboration, and communication; and patients commented on the competencies of professionalism and communication. Residents concluded that obtaining feedback from nurses and patients was acceptable and useful. They reported modifying certain behaviors after receiving the multisource feedback. CONCLUSION: Residents perceived the multisource feedback to be acceptable and useful for the assessment of medical competencies such as communication, collaboration, professionalism, and leadership.