Comparison of the medical students’ perceived self-efficacy and the evaluation of the observers and patients

BMC Medical Education

Poul-Erik Kofoed⁴  Anne Lindebo Holm Øvrehus¹  René Holst⁵  Dorte Ejg Jarbøl³  Janus Laust Thomsen³  Jette Ammentorp² 

[1] Education Development Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark;Health Services Research Unit, Lillebaelt Hospital/IRS University of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark;Research Unit of General Practice, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark;Department of Paediatrics, Kolding Hospital, Kolding, Denmark;Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Regional Health Service Research University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

关键词: Communication skills training;    Calgary Cambridge observation guide;    Self-efficacy;    Self-assessment;   

Others  :  1138955
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-13-49

 received in 2012-07-05, accepted in 2013-04-03,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The accuracy of self-assessment has been questioned in studies comparing physicians’ self-assessments to observed assessments; however, none of these studies used self-efficacy as a method for self-assessment.

The aim of the study was to investigate how medical students’ perceived self-efficacy of specific communication skills corresponds to the evaluation of simulated patients and observers.

Methods

All of the medical students who signed up for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) were included. As a part of the OSCE, the student performance in the “parent-physician interaction” was evaluated by a simulated patient and an observer at one of the stations. After the examination the students were asked to assess their self-efficacy according to the same specific communication skills.

The Calgary Cambridge Observation Guide formed the basis for the outcome measures used in the questionnaires.

A total of 12 items was rated on a Likert scale from 1–5 (strongly disagree to strongly agree).

We used extended Rasch models for comparisons between the groups of responses of the questionnaires. Comparisons of groups were conducted on dichotomized responses.

Results

Eighty-four students participated in the examination, 87% (73/84) of whom responded to the questionnaire. The response rate for the simulated patients and the observers was 100%.

Significantly more items were scored in the highest categories (4 and 5) by the observers and simulated patients compared to the students (observers versus students: -0.23; SE:0.112; p=0.002 and patients versus students:0.177; SE:0.109; p=0.037). When analysing the items individually, a statistically significant difference only existed for two items.

Conclusion

This study showed that students scored their communication skills lower compared to observers or simulated patients. The differences were driven by only 2 of 12 items.

The results in this study indicate that self-efficacy based on the Calgary Cambridge Observation guide seems to be a reliable tool.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Ammentorp et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Stewart M, Brown JB, Boon H, Galajda J, Meridith L, Sangster M: Evidence on patient-doctor communication. Can Prev Control 1999, 3:25-30.
• [2]Harrington J, Noble LM, Newman SP: Improving patients' communication with doctors. a systematic review of intervention studies. Patient Educ Couns 2004, 52:7-16.
• [3]Ong LML, De Haes JCJM, Hoos AM, Lammes FB: Doctor-patient communication: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1995, 40:903-918.
• [4]Silverman J, Kurtz S, Draper J: Skills for Communicating with Patients. Oxon: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd; 1998.
• [5]Cegala DJ, Lenzmeier BS: Physician communication skills training: a review of theoretical backgrounds, objectives and skills. Med Educ 2002, 36:1004-1016.
• [6]Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, Van Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L: Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA 2006, 296:1094-1102.
• [7]Eva KW, Regehr G: Self-assessment in the health professions: a reformulation and research agenda. Acad Med 2005, 80:S46-S54.
• [8]Blanch-Hartigan D: Medical students' self-assessment of performance: results from three meta-analyses. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 84:3-9.
• [9]Nikendei C, Bosse HM, Hoffmann KMA, Hancke R, Conrad C, Huwendiek S, Hoffmann GF, Herzog W, Junger J, Schultz JH: Outcome of parent-physician communication skills training for pediatric residents. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 82:94-99.
• [10]Doyle D, Copeland HL, Bush D, Stein L, Thompson S: A course for nurses to handle difficult communication situations. A randomized controlled trial of impact on self-efficacy and performance. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 82:100-109.
• [11]Bragard I, Etienne AM, Merckaert I, Libert Y, Razavi D: Efficacy of a communication and stress management training on medical residents' self-efficacy, stress to communicate and burnout: a randomized controlled study. J Health Psychol 2010, 15:1075-1081.
• [12]Gulbrandsen P, Jensen BF, Finset A: Self-efficacy among doctors in hospitals after a course in clinical communication [In Norwegian]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2009, 129:2343-2346.
• [13]Turner NM, Van De Leemput AJ, Draaisma Jos MT, Oosterveld P, Ten Cate Oll T: Validity of the visual analogue scale as an instrument to measure self-efficacy in resuscitation skills. Medical Education 2008, 42:503-511.
• [14]Ammentorp J, Kofoed PE: Coach training can improve the self-efficacy of neonatal nurses. A pilot study. Patient Educ Couns 2010, 79:258-261.
• [15]Ammentorp J, Sabroe S, Kofoed PE, Mainz J: The effect of training in communication skills on medical doctors' and nurses' self-efficacy. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 66:270-277.
• [16]Parle M, Maquire P, Heaven C: The development of a training model to improve health professionals' skills, self-efficacy and outcome expectancies when communicating with cancer patients. Soc Sci Med 1997, 44:231-240.
• [17]Bandura A: Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev 1977, 84:191-215.
• [18]Gist ME, Michell TR: Self-efficacy: a theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Acad Manage Rev 1992, 17:183-211.
• [19]van Dinther M, Dochy F, Segers M: Factors affecting students' self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review 2011, 6(2):95-108.
• [20]Mair P, Hatzinger R: CML based estimation of extended Rasch models with the eRm package. R. Psychology Science 2007, 1:26-43.
• [21]Hatzinger R, Rush T: IRT models with relaxed assumptions in eRm: a manual-like instruction. Psychology Science Quarterly 2009, 1:87-120.
• [22]Rasch G: Probabilistic Models for some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research; 1960.
• [23]R Development Core Team: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2012.
• [24]Lipsett PA, Harris I, Downing S: Resident self-other assessor agreement: influence of assessor, competency, and performance level. Arch Surg 2011, 146:901-906.
• [25]Laidlaw TS, Kaufman DM, Sargeant J, MacLeod H, Blake K, Simpson D: What makes a physician an exemplary communicator with patients? Patient Educ Couns 2007, 68:153-160.
• [26]Harasym PH, Woloschuk W, Cunning L: Undesired variance due to examiner stringency/leniency effect in communication skill scores assessed in OSCEs. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2008, 13:617-632.