Literature DB >> 34169464

Feedback Delivery in an Academic Cancer Centre: Reflections From an R2C2-based Microlearning Course.

Amir H Safavi1, Janet Papadakos2,3,4, Tina Papadakos2,3, Naa Kwarley Quartey2, Karen Lawrie2, Eden Klein2, Sarah Storer2, Jennifer Croke1,5, Barbara-Ann Millar1,5, Raymond Jang6, Andrea Bezjak1,5, Meredith E Giuliani7,8,9.   

Abstract

Feedback delivery and training have not been characterized in the context of academic cancer centres. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and utility of a microlearning course based on the R2C2 (Relationship, Reaction, Content, Coaching) feedback model and characterize multidisciplinary healthcare provider (HCP) perspectives on existing feedback practices in an academic cancer centre. Five HCP (two radiation oncologists, one medical oncologist, and two allied health professionals) with supervisory roles were selected by purposive sampling to participate in a prospective longitudinal qualitative study. Each participant completed a web-based multimedia course. Semi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted with each participant at four time points: pre- and immediately post-course, and at one- and three-months post course. All participants found the course to be time feasible and completed it in 10-20 min. Participants expressed that the course fulfilled their need for feedback training and that its adoption may normalize a feedback culture in the cancer centre. Three themes were identified regarding perceptions of existing feedback practices: (1) hierarchical and interdisciplinary relationships modulate feedback delivery, (2) interest in feedback delivery varies by duration of the supervisory relationship, and (3) the transactionality of supervisor-trainee relationships influences feedback delivery. This study demonstrates the perceived feasibility and utility of a digital microlearning approach for development of feedback competencies in an academic cancer centre, perceptions of cultural barriers to feedback delivery, and the need for organizational commitment to developing a feedback culture.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Feedback; Medical education; Microlearning; Multi-disciplinary; R2C2; Residency

Year:  2021        PMID: 34169464     DOI: 10.1007/s13187-021-02028-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Educ        ISSN: 0885-8195            Impact factor:   2.037


  13 in total

1.  Surgery residents and attending surgeons have different perceptions of feedback.

Authors:  A Sender Liberman; Moishe Liberman; Yvonne Steinert; Peter McLeod; Sarkis Meterissian
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.650

Review 2.  The impact of E-learning in medical education.

Authors:  Jorge G Ruiz; Michael J Mintzer; Rosanne M Leipzig
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 3.  Information technologies and the transformation of nursing education.

Authors:  Diane J Skiba; Helen R Connors; Pamela R Jeffries
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.250

4.  Why medical educators may be failing at feedback.

Authors:  Robert G Bing-You; Robert L Trowbridge
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-09-23       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  A Better Pathway? Building Consensus and Engaging Providers with Feedback to Improve and Standardize Cancer Care.

Authors:  Sarah Colonna; John Sweetenham; Trever B Burgon; Saundra S Buys; Ray Lynch; Trang Au; Eric Johnson; Timothy Kubal; David Paculdo; Maria Czarina Acelajado; John W Peabody
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 6.  The Feedback Tango: An Integrative Review and Analysis of the Content of the Teacher-Learner Feedback Exchange.

Authors:  Robert Bing-You; Kalli Varaklis; Victoria Hayes; Robert Trowbridge; Heather Kemp; Dina McKelvy
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 6.893

7.  Changes in the care of non-small-cell lung cancer after audit and feedback: the Florida initiative for quality cancer care.

Authors:  Tawee Tanvetyanon; Ji-Hyun Lee; William J Fulp; Fred Schreiber; Richard H Brown; Richard M Levine; Thomas H Cartwright; Guillermo Abesada-Terk; George P Kim; Carlos Alemany; Douglas Faig; Philip V Sharp; Merry-Jennifer Markham; Mokenge Malafa; Paul B Jacobsen
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  In-the-Moment Feedback and Coaching: Improving R2C2 for a New Context.

Authors:  Jocelyn Lockyer; Heather Armson; Karen D Könings; Rachelle C W Lee-Krueger; Amanda Roze des Ordons; Subha Ramani; Jessica Trier; Mary Grace Zetkulic; Joan Sargeant
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2020-02

9.  Guidelines: The do's, don'ts and don't knows of direct observation of clinical skills in medical education.

Authors:  Jennifer R Kogan; Rose Hatala; Karen E Hauer; Eric Holmboe
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2017-10

10.  Developing longitudinal qualitative designs: lessons learned and recommendations for health services research.

Authors:  Lynn Calman; Lisa Brunton; Alex Molassiotis
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.