临床教师在 OSTE 期间会处理哪些反馈内容?

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Advances in Medical Education and Practice Pub Date : 2023-12-07 DOI:10.2147/amep.s423586
Robin Lüchinger, Matteo Coen, Anne-Claire Bréchet Bachmann, Sara de Oliveira, Hélène Richard-Lepouriel, Noëlle Junod Perron
{"title":"临床教师在 OSTE 期间会处理哪些反馈内容?","authors":"Robin Lüchinger, Matteo Coen, Anne-Claire Bréchet Bachmann, Sara de Oliveira, Hélène Richard-Lepouriel, Noëlle Junod Perron","doi":"10.2147/amep.s423586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Purpose:</strong> How to give feedback is widely taught and assessed during Faculty Development programs. As part of such programs, clinical teachers can attend objective structured teaching sessions (OSTEs), during which they are asked to give feedback to simulated residents on different tasks. Study aimed at: -analysing the feedback content provided during these OSTEs; -evaluating the impact of the training phase, medical discipline, or observed task; -assessing the alignment between feedback content addressed by clinical teachers and content identified as essential by experts.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> We conducted a multimethod study. Clinical teachers (N=89) from five departments were trained to give feedback to residents in a six-month training program. Before and after training, they completed three OSTE stations which focused on tasks involving communication, interprofessional, physical exam or procedural skills. We analysed feedback content descriptively. ANOVA test was applied to evaluate feedback contents’ influencing factors (ie participants’ training phase, medical discipline, type of task addressed). For each OSTE, we analysed the percentage of items identified as essential by 3 experts that were addressed by clinical teachers during the feedback.<br/><strong>Results:</strong> We analysed 317 feedback sessions and coded 5388 occurrences. Feedback content distribution was: targeted content (73%), other clinical content (20%), learning strategies (4%), and self-management/other (3%). Feedback was often negative (73%). The training phase did not influence the content addressed while the topic of the observed task and clinical teachers’ specialization slightly did. Alignment between content identified by experts and addressed by clinical teachers during OSTEs was low (3– 38%).<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Clinical teachers give mostly negative and targeted feedback according to the task. The poor alignment in selecting key content to be addressed is striking and should be further explored since clinical teachers may address elements of competence more according to their personal preferences than to residents’ needs and context priorities.<br/><br/><strong>Keywords:</strong> OSTEs, feedback content, clinical teacher, simulation, chief residents, fellow<br/>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Feedback Content Do Clinical Teachers Address During OSTEs?\",\"authors\":\"Robin Lüchinger, Matteo Coen, Anne-Claire Bréchet Bachmann, Sara de Oliveira, Hélène Richard-Lepouriel, Noëlle Junod Perron\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/amep.s423586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong>Purpose:</strong> How to give feedback is widely taught and assessed during Faculty Development programs. As part of such programs, clinical teachers can attend objective structured teaching sessions (OSTEs), during which they are asked to give feedback to simulated residents on different tasks. Study aimed at: -analysing the feedback content provided during these OSTEs; -evaluating the impact of the training phase, medical discipline, or observed task; -assessing the alignment between feedback content addressed by clinical teachers and content identified as essential by experts.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> We conducted a multimethod study. Clinical teachers (N=89) from five departments were trained to give feedback to residents in a six-month training program. Before and after training, they completed three OSTE stations which focused on tasks involving communication, interprofessional, physical exam or procedural skills. We analysed feedback content descriptively. ANOVA test was applied to evaluate feedback contents’ influencing factors (ie participants’ training phase, medical discipline, type of task addressed). For each OSTE, we analysed the percentage of items identified as essential by 3 experts that were addressed by clinical teachers during the feedback.<br/><strong>Results:</strong> We analysed 317 feedback sessions and coded 5388 occurrences. Feedback content distribution was: targeted content (73%), other clinical content (20%), learning strategies (4%), and self-management/other (3%). Feedback was often negative (73%). The training phase did not influence the content addressed while the topic of the observed task and clinical teachers’ specialization slightly did. Alignment between content identified by experts and addressed by clinical teachers during OSTEs was low (3– 38%).<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Clinical teachers give mostly negative and targeted feedback according to the task. The poor alignment in selecting key content to be addressed is striking and should be further explored since clinical teachers may address elements of competence more according to their personal preferences than to residents’ needs and context priorities.<br/><br/><strong>Keywords:</strong> OSTEs, feedback content, clinical teacher, simulation, chief residents, fellow<br/>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.s423586\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.s423586","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在师资发展计划中,如何给予反馈被广泛教授和评估。作为此类计划的一部分,临床教师可以参加客观结构化教学课程(OSTE),在此期间,他们被要求就不同的任务向模拟住院医师提供反馈。本研究旨在-分析在这些客观结构化教学过程中提供的反馈内容;评估培训阶段、医学学科或观察任务的影响;评估临床教师处理的反馈内容与专家认定的基本内容之间的一致性:我们开展了一项多方法研究。来自五个科室的临床教师(人数=89)接受了为期六个月的住院医师反馈培训。在培训前后,他们完成了三个 OSTE 站,重点是涉及沟通、跨专业、体格检查或程序技能的任务。我们对反馈内容进行了描述性分析。方差分析检验用于评估反馈内容的影响因素(即学员的培训阶段、医学学科、任务类型)。对于每项开放式培训,我们分析了临床教师在反馈过程中处理的由 3 位专家确定为必要的项目所占的百分比:我们分析了 317 次反馈,对 5388 次反馈进行了编码。反馈内容分布为:目标内容(73%)、其他临床内容(20%)、学习策略(4%)和自我管理/其他(3%)。反馈通常是负面的(73%)。培训阶段并不影响所涉及的内容,而观察任务的主题和临床教师的专业则略有影响。专家确定的内容与临床教师在开放式培训中涉及的内容之间的一致性较低(3- 38%):结论:临床教师根据任务给出的反馈大多是负面的、有针对性的。临床教师在选择关键反馈内容时的一致性很差,这一点值得进一步探讨,因为临床教师可能更多地是根据自己的个人偏好而不是住院医师的需求和背景优先事项来处理能力要素:OSTE;反馈内容;临床教师;模拟;住院总医师;研究员
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
What Feedback Content Do Clinical Teachers Address During OSTEs?
Purpose: How to give feedback is widely taught and assessed during Faculty Development programs. As part of such programs, clinical teachers can attend objective structured teaching sessions (OSTEs), during which they are asked to give feedback to simulated residents on different tasks. Study aimed at: -analysing the feedback content provided during these OSTEs; -evaluating the impact of the training phase, medical discipline, or observed task; -assessing the alignment between feedback content addressed by clinical teachers and content identified as essential by experts.
Methods: We conducted a multimethod study. Clinical teachers (N=89) from five departments were trained to give feedback to residents in a six-month training program. Before and after training, they completed three OSTE stations which focused on tasks involving communication, interprofessional, physical exam or procedural skills. We analysed feedback content descriptively. ANOVA test was applied to evaluate feedback contents’ influencing factors (ie participants’ training phase, medical discipline, type of task addressed). For each OSTE, we analysed the percentage of items identified as essential by 3 experts that were addressed by clinical teachers during the feedback.
Results: We analysed 317 feedback sessions and coded 5388 occurrences. Feedback content distribution was: targeted content (73%), other clinical content (20%), learning strategies (4%), and self-management/other (3%). Feedback was often negative (73%). The training phase did not influence the content addressed while the topic of the observed task and clinical teachers’ specialization slightly did. Alignment between content identified by experts and addressed by clinical teachers during OSTEs was low (3– 38%).
Conclusion: Clinical teachers give mostly negative and targeted feedback according to the task. The poor alignment in selecting key content to be addressed is striking and should be further explored since clinical teachers may address elements of competence more according to their personal preferences than to residents’ needs and context priorities.

Keywords: OSTEs, feedback content, clinical teacher, simulation, chief residents, fellow
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Medical Education and Practice
Advances in Medical Education and Practice EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
189
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Developing and Validating Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for Rheumatology Fellowship Training Programs in Saudi Arabia: A Delphi Study Students’ Perception of Peer- Students Mentoring Program “Big Sibling Mentoring Program” to Complement Faculty Mentoring of First-Year Medical Students in Saudi Arabia Incorporating Technology Adoption in Medical Education: A Qualitative Study of Medical Students’ Perspectives [Letter] Development, Implementation, and Assessment of an Online Modular Telehealth Curriculum for Health Professions Students [Letter] Competency of Nurses on Electrocardiogram Monitoring and Interpretation in Selected Hospitals of Al-Ahsa, Saudi Arabia
×
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