Assessment of a peer review process among interns at an Australian hospital

Abstract

Purpose. This study considered how a peer review process could work in an Australian public hospital setting. Method. Up to 229 medical personnel completed an online performance assessment of 52 Junior Medical Officers (JMOs) during the last quarter of 2008. Results. Results indicated that the registrar was the most suitable person to assess interns, although other professionals, including interns themselves, were identified as capable of playing a role in a more holistic appraisal system. Significant sex differences were also found, which may be worthy of further study. Also, the affirmative rather than the formative aspect of the assessment results suggested that the criteria and questions posed in peer review be re-examined. Conclusion. A peer review process was able to be readily implemented in a large institution, and respondents were positive towards peer review generally as a valuable tool in the development of junior medical staff. What is known about the topic? The literature generally concurs that peer review is a useful tool in professional development and can provide a rounded view from diverse sources about a peer’s professional performance. It has been implemented in at least one Canadian medical facility as a mandatory process. What does this paper add? Our study identifies who is considered the most suitable peer(s) to assess interns, various substantive issues about peer review and about the process itself, and raises questions about the voluntary v. mandatory nature of peer review. It is the first study to trial peer review amongst interns in an Australian hospital. What are the implications for practitioners? That peer review is a suitable tool in professional development and generally supported in our study, suggesting that it could be implemented into Australian healthcare practice. However, education about the nature and value of peer review would be required amongst healthcare professionals, and the use of peer review could imply greater managerial engagement in medical practice. Peer review is a more effective assessment tool than that currently employed in many Australian hospitals.