Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education

Abstract Background Undergraduate medical education recognises that patient feedback is potentially valuable for student learning and development as a component of multi-source feedback. However greater exploration of how patient feedback perspectives differ to clinical educators is required for cur...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jennifer Barr, Kathryn Ogden, Iain Robertson, Jenepher Martin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-04-01
Series:BMC Medical Education
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02654-3
_version_ 1818413876994113536
author Jennifer Barr
Kathryn Ogden
Iain Robertson
Jenepher Martin
author_facet Jennifer Barr
Kathryn Ogden
Iain Robertson
Jenepher Martin
author_sort Jennifer Barr
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Undergraduate medical education recognises that patient feedback is potentially valuable for student learning and development as a component of multi-source feedback. However greater exploration of how patient feedback perspectives differ to clinical educators is required for curriculum development and improving student feedback literacy. This study aimed to determine how two sources of feedback, patients and clinical tutors, compare on the same patient-centred, interpersonal criteria. Methods A patient feedback instrument designed for the undergraduate medical education setting was used to compare patients’ feedback with clinical tutors’ feedback following a student-patient consultation in the learning context. Assessments from 222 learning consultations involving 40 medical students were collected. Descriptive statistics for tutors and patients for each question were calculated and correlations between patient and tutor were explored using Spearman’s rank-order correlation. Mixed effects ordered logistic regression was used to compare each question with an overall rating for tutor and patients in addition to comparing patient with tutor ratings. Results Clinical tutor and patient assessments had a weak but significant positive correlation in all areas except questions related to respect and concern. When making judgements compared with overall assessment, patients’ ratings of respect, concern, communication and being understood in the consultation have a greater effect. After eliminating the effect of generally higher ratings by patients compared with tutors using comparative ordered logistic regression, patients rated students relatively less competent in areas of personal interaction. Conclusion This study provides insight about patient feedback, which is required to continue improving the use and acceptability of this multisource feedback to students as a valuable component of their social learning environment. We have revealed the different perspective-specific judgement that patients bring to feedback. This finding contributes to building respect for patient feedback through greater understanding of the elements of consultations for which patients can discriminate performance.
first_indexed 2024-12-14T11:10:11Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f1642c4d71e2492b8d7a0266e0621dfc
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1472-6920
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T11:10:11Z
publishDate 2021-04-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Medical Education
spelling doaj.art-f1642c4d71e2492b8d7a0266e0621dfc2022-12-21T23:04:21ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202021-04-012111910.1186/s12909-021-02654-3Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical educationJennifer Barr0Kathryn Ogden1Iain Robertson2Jenepher Martin3Tasmanian School of Medicine, University of TasmaniaTasmanian School of Medicine, University of TasmaniaClifford Craig FoundationEastern Health Clinical School, Monash UniversityAbstract Background Undergraduate medical education recognises that patient feedback is potentially valuable for student learning and development as a component of multi-source feedback. However greater exploration of how patient feedback perspectives differ to clinical educators is required for curriculum development and improving student feedback literacy. This study aimed to determine how two sources of feedback, patients and clinical tutors, compare on the same patient-centred, interpersonal criteria. Methods A patient feedback instrument designed for the undergraduate medical education setting was used to compare patients’ feedback with clinical tutors’ feedback following a student-patient consultation in the learning context. Assessments from 222 learning consultations involving 40 medical students were collected. Descriptive statistics for tutors and patients for each question were calculated and correlations between patient and tutor were explored using Spearman’s rank-order correlation. Mixed effects ordered logistic regression was used to compare each question with an overall rating for tutor and patients in addition to comparing patient with tutor ratings. Results Clinical tutor and patient assessments had a weak but significant positive correlation in all areas except questions related to respect and concern. When making judgements compared with overall assessment, patients’ ratings of respect, concern, communication and being understood in the consultation have a greater effect. After eliminating the effect of generally higher ratings by patients compared with tutors using comparative ordered logistic regression, patients rated students relatively less competent in areas of personal interaction. Conclusion This study provides insight about patient feedback, which is required to continue improving the use and acceptability of this multisource feedback to students as a valuable component of their social learning environment. We have revealed the different perspective-specific judgement that patients bring to feedback. This finding contributes to building respect for patient feedback through greater understanding of the elements of consultations for which patients can discriminate performance.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02654-3Patient feedbackMultisource feedbackMedical education
spellingShingle Jennifer Barr
Kathryn Ogden
Iain Robertson
Jenepher Martin
Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
BMC Medical Education
Patient feedback
Multisource feedback
Medical education
title Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
title_full Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
title_fullStr Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
title_full_unstemmed Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
title_short Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
title_sort exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education
topic Patient feedback
Multisource feedback
Medical education
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02654-3
work_keys_str_mv AT jenniferbarr exploringhowdifferentlypatientsandclinicaltutorsseethesameconsultationbuildingevidenceforinclusionofrealpatientfeedbackinmedicaleducation
AT kathrynogden exploringhowdifferentlypatientsandclinicaltutorsseethesameconsultationbuildingevidenceforinclusionofrealpatientfeedbackinmedicaleducation
AT iainrobertson exploringhowdifferentlypatientsandclinicaltutorsseethesameconsultationbuildingevidenceforinclusionofrealpatientfeedbackinmedicaleducation
AT jenephermartin exploringhowdifferentlypatientsandclinicaltutorsseethesameconsultationbuildingevidenceforinclusionofrealpatientfeedbackinmedicaleducation