Medical Students' General Beliefs and Specific Perceptions about Patient Feedback Before and after Training in a Clinical Context.

Introduction: Despite its high potential, patient feedback does not always result in learning. For feedback to be effective students must engage with it, which partly depends on their perceptions of feedback. To better understand student engagement with patient feedback in a clinical context, this study explored the following research questions: 1) What are medical students' general beliefs about patient feedback and what are their specific perceptions of feedback messages? 2) What is the difference between these general beliefs and feedback message perceptions before and after patient feedback training? Methods: The study context was a 12-week clerkship combining Pediatrics and Gynecology, which included feedback training for students and asking for patient feedback. Ninety 4th-year medical students completed pre- and post-clerkship questionnaires. The questionnaires (Beliefs about Patient Feedback Questionnaire, Feedback Perception Questionnaire) were adapted from validated peer-feedback questionnaires. Questionnaires were quantitatively analyzed. Results: Both pre- and post-clerkship, students had positive general beliefs about patient feedback and positive perceptions of the feedback messages they received. However, paired t-tests showed that students' general beliefs and feedback message perceptions became less positive after feedback training and experience. Discussion: Patient feedback is not an easy means to learn and students do not become feedback literate in terms of patient feedback overnight. We suggest that future researchers further explore reasons for the decline in positive perceptions of patient feedback. We suggest implementing longitudinal feedback training in medical curricula, where students are guided and supported in the complex task of learning from patients through feedback.

An Interprofessional Faculty Development Program for Workplace-Based Learning.

Background: Most faculty development programs in health professions education, pivotal in cultivating competent and effective teachers, focus on systematic, planned and formal learning opportunities. A large part of clinical teaching however, encompasses ad-hoc, informal and interprofessional workplace-based learning whereby individuals learn as part of everyday work activities. To fully harness the educational potential embedded in daily healthcare practices, prioritizing interprofessional faculty development for workplace-based learning is crucial. Approach: Utilizing the 'ADDIE' instructional design framework we developed, implemented and evaluated an interprofessional faculty development program for workplace-based learning. This program, encompassing seven formal training sessions each with a different theme and five individual workplace-based assignments, aimed to support clinical teachers in recognizing and optimizing informal learning. Outcomes: The pilot program (n = 10) and first two regular courses (n = 13 each) were evaluated using questionnaires containing Likert scale items and open textboxes for narrative comments. The quality and relevance of the program to the clinical work-place were highly appreciated. Additional valued elements included practical knowledge provided and tools for informal workplace-based teaching, the interprofessional aspect of the program and the workplace-based assignments. Since its development, the program has undergone minor revisions twice and has now become a successful interprofessional workplace-based alternative to existing faculty development programs. Reflection: This faculty development program addresses the specific needs of healthcare professionals teaching in clinical settings. It stands out by prioritizing informal learning, fostering collaboration, and supporting integration of formal training into daily practice, ensuring practical application of learned knowledge and skills. Furthermore, it emphasizes interprofessional teaching and learning, enhancing workplace environments.