Abstract
Background
Physician professionalism, including anaesthesiologists and intensive care doctors, should be continuously assessed during training and subsequent clinical practice. Multi-source feedback (MSF) is an assessment system in which healthcare professionals are assessed on several constructs (e.g., communication, professionalism, etc.) by multiple people (medical colleagues, coworkers, patients, self) in their sphere of influence. MSF has gained widespread acceptance for both formative and summative assessment of professionalism for reflecting on how to improve clinical practice.
Methods
Instrument development and psychometric analysis (feasibility, reliability, construct validity via exploratory factor analysis) for MSF questionnaires in a postgraduate specialty training in Anaesthesiology and intensive care in Italy. Sixty-four residents at the Università del Piemonte Orientale (Italy) Anesthesiology Residency Program. Main outcomes assessed were: development and psychometric testing of 4 questionnaires: self, medical colleague, coworker and patient assessment.
Results
Overall 605 medical colleague questionnaires (mean of 9.3 ±1.9) and 543 coworker surveys (mean 8.4 ±1.4) were collected providing high mean ratings for all items (> 4.0 /5.0). The self-assessment item mean score ranged from 3.1 to 4.3. Patient questionnaires (n = 308) were returned from 31 residents (40%; mean 9.9 ± 6.2). Three items had high percentages of “unable to assess” (> 15%) in coworker questionnaires. Factor analyses resulted in a two-factor solution: clinical management with leadership and accountability accounting for at least 75% of the total variance for the medical colleague and coworker’s survey with high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α > 0.9). Patient’s questionnaires had a low return rate, a limited exploratory analysis was performed.
Conclusions
We provide a feasible and reliable Italian language MSF instrument with evidence of construct validity for the self, coworkers and medical colleague. Patient feedback was difficult to collect in our setting.
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference46 articles.
1. Transforming the learning outcomes of anaesthesiology training into entrustable professional activities: A Delphi study;N Wisman-Zwarter;European Journal of Anaesthesiology,2016
2. The reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment: a systematic review;T Donnon;Acad Med,2014
3. The accreditation system of Italian medical residency programs: fostering quality and sustainability of the National Health Service;W Mazzucco;Acta Biomed,2019
4. European Training Requirements (ETR) in Anaesthesiology. 17 Jun 2019. Available from: https://www.uems.eu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/64398/UEMS-2018.17-European-Training-Requirements-in-Anaesthesiology.pdf.
5. Training Requirements for the Core Curriculum of Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Medicine 2014 28 November 2019. Available from: https://www.uems.eu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/44437/UEMS-2014.40-European-Training-Requirements-Intensive-Care-Medicine.pdf.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献