A Study to Analyze Narrative Feedback Record of an Emergency Department.

IF 0.8 Q4 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Journal of acute medicine Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.6705/j.jacme.202106_11(2).0001
Chen-Wei Lee, Guan-Liang Chen, Mei-Ju Yu, Po-Liang Cheng, Yi-Kung Lee
{"title":"A Study to Analyze Narrative Feedback Record of an Emergency Department.","authors":"Chen-Wei Lee,&nbsp;Guan-Liang Chen,&nbsp;Mei-Ju Yu,&nbsp;Po-Liang Cheng,&nbsp;Yi-Kung Lee","doi":"10.6705/j.jacme.202106_11(2).0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study adopts the Situation-Behavior-Impact-Action (SBIA) model to examine the compliance of narrative feedback in the Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs)-based e-Portfolio system for clinical preceptors in the emergency department of a regional teaching hospital, and analyzes the applicability of its application in emergency clinical training to increase the feasibility of improving the quality of clinical preceptors' feedback content.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Application of data mining technique to analyze 928 data points was recorded by 14 clinical teachers from April 2017 to May 2019. These data points were narrative feedback from workplace direct observation, which was recorded in the EPAs-based e-Portfolio.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of the narrative feedback consisted of only one component, behavior observed (53.99%) and action suggestion (17.24%). Some feedback consisted of two to three components; which were behavior observed-action suggestion (20.37%) and situation description-behavior observed- action suggestion (1.29%). Only a few feedbacks consisted of all four components: situation description- behavior observed-possible impact-action suggestion (0.75%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The current narrative feedback is from the basic appearance of SBIA, but there still got room for improvement. The narrative feedback should be given according to SBIA model in order to provide a comprehensive and constructive learning outcome. The narrative feedback recorded in EPAsbased e-Portfolio provides the delay of feedback effect. Thus, multiple feedbacks from various clinical teachers could make the assessments more concrete and outline the authentic clinical condition of the trainees.</p>","PeriodicalId":14846,"journal":{"name":"Journal of acute medicine","volume":"11 2","pages":"39-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238687/pdf/jacme-11-2-01.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of acute medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6705/j.jacme.202106_11(2).0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: This study adopts the Situation-Behavior-Impact-Action (SBIA) model to examine the compliance of narrative feedback in the Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs)-based e-Portfolio system for clinical preceptors in the emergency department of a regional teaching hospital, and analyzes the applicability of its application in emergency clinical training to increase the feasibility of improving the quality of clinical preceptors' feedback content.

Methods: Application of data mining technique to analyze 928 data points was recorded by 14 clinical teachers from April 2017 to May 2019. These data points were narrative feedback from workplace direct observation, which was recorded in the EPAs-based e-Portfolio.

Results: The majority of the narrative feedback consisted of only one component, behavior observed (53.99%) and action suggestion (17.24%). Some feedback consisted of two to three components; which were behavior observed-action suggestion (20.37%) and situation description-behavior observed- action suggestion (1.29%). Only a few feedbacks consisted of all four components: situation description- behavior observed-possible impact-action suggestion (0.75%).

Conclusions: The current narrative feedback is from the basic appearance of SBIA, but there still got room for improvement. The narrative feedback should be given according to SBIA model in order to provide a comprehensive and constructive learning outcome. The narrative feedback recorded in EPAsbased e-Portfolio provides the delay of feedback effect. Thus, multiple feedbacks from various clinical teachers could make the assessments more concrete and outline the authentic clinical condition of the trainees.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
某急诊科叙述性反馈记录分析研究
背景:本研究采用情境-行为-影响-行动(Situation-Behavior-Impact-Action, SBIA)模型对某地区教学医院急诊科临床指导员基于可信赖专业活动(EPAs)的电子档案系统中叙述性反馈的依从性进行考察,并分析其在急诊临床培训中的适用性,以增加提高临床指导员反馈内容质量的可行性。方法:应用数据挖掘技术对14名临床教师2017年4月至2019年5月记录的928个数据点进行分析。这些数据点是来自工作场所直接观察的叙述性反馈,记录在基于epas的电子投资组合中。结果:大多数叙事反馈仅由行为观察(53.99%)和行动建议(17.24%)组成。有些反馈包括两到三个部分;分别为行为观察-行动建议(20.37%)和情境描述-行为观察-行动建议(1.29%)。只有少数反馈包含所有四个组成部分:情况描述-观察到的行为-可能的影响-行动建议(0.75%)。结论:目前的叙事反馈来自SBIA的基本外观,但仍有改进的空间。为了提供一个全面的、建设性的学习结果,叙述性反馈应按照SBIA模型进行。基于epase - portfolio记录的叙述性反馈提供了反馈效果的延迟。因此,来自不同临床教师的多重反馈可以使评估更加具体,勾勒出学员真实的临床状况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of acute medicine
Journal of acute medicine EMERGENCY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
International Collaboration in Taiwan Emergency Department Publications: A Social Network Analysis. Left Ventricular Perforation Following Transcutaneous Pigtail Catheter Placement Mimicking Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction: An Unusual Complication. Review of Emamectin Benzoate Poisoning. The Effect of a Separate Flow of Patients With Small Traumatic Injuries on Consult Time and Patient Satisfaction: A Retrospective Cohort Study During COVID-19 in the Emergency Department. Woman With Recurrent Syncope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1