Factors predicting doctors’ reporting of performance change in response to multisource feedback

BMC Medical Education

Research Article

Onyebuchi A Arah¹  Kiki MJMH Lombarts²  Hub C Wollersheimh³  Karlijn Overeem³  Richard PTM Grol³  Juliette K Cruijsberg³ 

[1] Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA;Center for Health Policy Research, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA;Department of Quality and Process Innovation, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Department of Quality and Process Innovation, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;IQ healthcare, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;

关键词: Performance assessment;    Mentoring;    Multisource feedback;    Physicians;    Continuous medical education;   

DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-12-52

 received in 2011-12-29, accepted in 2012-07-10,  发布年份 2012

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundMulti-source feedback (MSF) offers doctors feedback on their performance from peers (medical colleagues), coworkers and patients. Researchers increasingly point to the fact that only a small majority of doctors (60–70 percent) benefit from MSF. Building on medical education and social psychology literature, the authors identified several factors that may influence change in response to MSF. Subsequently, they quantitatively studied the factors that advance the use of MSF for practice change.MethodsThis observational study was set in 26 non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. In total, 458 specialists participated in the MSF program. Besides the collation of questionnaires, the Dutch MSF program is composed of a reflective portfolio and a facilitative interview aimed at increasing the acceptance and use of MSF. All specialists who finished a MSF procedure between May 2008 and September 2010 were invited to complete an evaluation form. The dependent variable was self-reported change. Three categories of independent variables (personal characteristics, experiences with the assessments and mean MSF ratings) were included in the analysis. Multivariate regression analysis techniques were used to identify the relation between the independent variables and specialists’ reported change in actual practice.ResultsIn total, 238 medical specialists (response rate 52 percent) returned an evaluation form and participated in the study. A small majority (55 percent) of specialists reported to have changed their professional performance in one or more aspects in response to MSF. Regression analyses revealed that two variables had the most effect on reported change. Perceived quality of mentoring positively influenced reported change (regression coefficient beta = 0.527, p < 0.05) as did negative scores offered by colleagues. (regression coefficient beta = −0.157, p < 0.05). The explained variance of these two variables combined was 34 percent.ConclusionsPerceived quality of mentoring and MSF ratings from colleagues seem to be the main motivators for the self-reported change in response to MSF by specialists. These insights could leverage in increasing the use of MSF for practice change by investing in the quality of mentors.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Overeem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012