Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data
Abstract Background Multisource feedback is an evidence-based and validated tool used to provide clinicians, including those in training, feedback on their professional and interpersonal skills. Multisource feedback is mandatory for participants in the Royal Australian College of General Practitione...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2022-06-01
|
| Series: | BMC Medical Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03559-5 |
| _version_ | 1818550434984361984 |
|---|---|
| author | Caitlin Vayro Ajit Narayanan Michael Greco Neil Spike Jan Hanson Ben Mitchell Dale Hanson Rebecca Stewart |
| author_facet | Caitlin Vayro Ajit Narayanan Michael Greco Neil Spike Jan Hanson Ben Mitchell Dale Hanson Rebecca Stewart |
| author_sort | Caitlin Vayro |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Multisource feedback is an evidence-based and validated tool used to provide clinicians, including those in training, feedback on their professional and interpersonal skills. Multisource feedback is mandatory for participants in the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Practice Experience Program and for some Australian General Practice Training Registrars. Given the recency of the Practice Experience Program, there are currently no benchmarks available for comparison within the program and to other comparable cohorts including doctors in the Australian General Practice Training program. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare colleague feedback within and across General Practice trainee cohorts. Methods Colleague feedback, from multisource feedback of Practice Experience Program participants and Australian General Practice Training Registrars, collected between January 2018 and April 2020, was compared to identify similarities and differences. Analyses entailed descriptive statistics, between and within groups rater consistency and agreement measures, principal component analysis, t-tests, analysis of variance, and psychometric network analysis. Results Colleague ratings of Practice Experience Program participants (overall average 88.58%) were lower than for Registrars (89.08%), although this difference was not significant. ‘Communication with patients’ was rated significantly lower for Practice Experience Program participants (2.13%) while this group was rated significantly better for their ‘Ability to say no’ (1.78%). Psychometric network analyses showed stronger linkages between items making up the behavioural component (compared to the items of the performance and self-management components, as found by principal component analysis) for Practice Experience Program participants as compared to Registrars. Practice Experience Program participants were stronger in clinical knowledge and skills as well as confidentiality, while Registrars were stronger in communicating with patients, managing their own stress, and in their management and leadership skills. Conclusions The multisource feedback scores of doctors undertaking the Practice Experience Program suggests that, while all mean values are ‘very good’ to ‘excellent’, there are areas for improvement. The linkages between skills suggests that Practice Experience Program doctors’ skills are somewhat isolated and have yet to fully synthesise. We now have a better understanding of how different groups of General Practitioners in training compare with respect to professional and interpersonal skills. Based on the demonstrated differences, the Practice Experience Program might benefit from the addition of educational activities to target the less developed skills. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T08:46:26Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-12d16bd42feb46898efc029c5f4d24be |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6920 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T08:46:26Z |
| publishDate | 2022-06-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Medical Education |
| spelling | doaj.art-12d16bd42feb46898efc029c5f4d24be2022-12-22T00:30:30ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202022-06-0122111110.1186/s12909-022-03559-5Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback dataCaitlin Vayro0Ajit Narayanan1Michael Greco2Neil Spike3Jan Hanson4Ben Mitchell5Dale Hanson6Rebecca Stewart7General Practice Training QueenslandSchool of Engineering, Computer and Mathematical Sciences, Auckland University of TechnologySchool of Medicine, Griffith UniversityEastern Victoria General Practice TrainingGeneral Practice Training QueenslandGeneral Practice Training QueenslandGeneral Practice Training QueenslandGeneral Practice Training QueenslandAbstract Background Multisource feedback is an evidence-based and validated tool used to provide clinicians, including those in training, feedback on their professional and interpersonal skills. Multisource feedback is mandatory for participants in the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Practice Experience Program and for some Australian General Practice Training Registrars. Given the recency of the Practice Experience Program, there are currently no benchmarks available for comparison within the program and to other comparable cohorts including doctors in the Australian General Practice Training program. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare colleague feedback within and across General Practice trainee cohorts. Methods Colleague feedback, from multisource feedback of Practice Experience Program participants and Australian General Practice Training Registrars, collected between January 2018 and April 2020, was compared to identify similarities and differences. Analyses entailed descriptive statistics, between and within groups rater consistency and agreement measures, principal component analysis, t-tests, analysis of variance, and psychometric network analysis. Results Colleague ratings of Practice Experience Program participants (overall average 88.58%) were lower than for Registrars (89.08%), although this difference was not significant. ‘Communication with patients’ was rated significantly lower for Practice Experience Program participants (2.13%) while this group was rated significantly better for their ‘Ability to say no’ (1.78%). Psychometric network analyses showed stronger linkages between items making up the behavioural component (compared to the items of the performance and self-management components, as found by principal component analysis) for Practice Experience Program participants as compared to Registrars. Practice Experience Program participants were stronger in clinical knowledge and skills as well as confidentiality, while Registrars were stronger in communicating with patients, managing their own stress, and in their management and leadership skills. Conclusions The multisource feedback scores of doctors undertaking the Practice Experience Program suggests that, while all mean values are ‘very good’ to ‘excellent’, there are areas for improvement. The linkages between skills suggests that Practice Experience Program doctors’ skills are somewhat isolated and have yet to fully synthesise. We now have a better understanding of how different groups of General Practitioners in training compare with respect to professional and interpersonal skills. Based on the demonstrated differences, the Practice Experience Program might benefit from the addition of educational activities to target the less developed skills.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03559-5Professional developmentProfessionalismMultisource feedbackGPs in TrainingGP RegistrarsCommunication skills |
| spellingShingle | Caitlin Vayro Ajit Narayanan Michael Greco Neil Spike Jan Hanson Ben Mitchell Dale Hanson Rebecca Stewart Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data BMC Medical Education Professional development Professionalism Multisource feedback GPs in Training GP Registrars Communication skills |
| title | Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| title_full | Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| title_fullStr | Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| title_short | Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| title_sort | colleague appraisal of australian general practitioners in training an analysis of multisource feedback data |
| topic | Professional development Professionalism Multisource feedback GPs in Training GP Registrars Communication skills |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03559-5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT caitlinvayro colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT ajitnarayanan colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT michaelgreco colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT neilspike colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT janhanson colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT benmitchell colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT dalehanson colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata AT rebeccastewart colleagueappraisalofaustraliangeneralpractitionersintrainingananalysisofmultisourcefeedbackdata |