Faculty Self-Evaluation of Experiences with Delivering Feedback to Trainees Across Academic Ranks.

BACKGROUND: The ability to provide feedback is a developable faculty skill; however, it is unclear how academic rank impacts experiences with feedback delivery. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 1258 physicians of all academic ranks at a large academic medical center. Questions explored the respondent's feedback delivery beliefs and barriers. RESULTS: In total, 96% of respondents agreed feedback is important to resident education. Higher academic rank correlated with increased comfort with feedback delivery, and 89% of respondents experienced at least 1 barrier to feedback delivery. CONCLUSION: Feedback experiences vary across academic ranks, with full professors being more comfortable with feedback delivery and less likely to experience barriers. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-020-01196-5.

Feedback during summative clinical assessments: Experiences of diagnostic radiography students at a higher education institution in South Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Summative clinical assessments and feedback, conducted at clinical training sites, are vital for successfully preparing undergraduate diagnostic radiography students to become competent, skilled diagnostic radiographers. However, providing appropriate feedback in a clinical context is a complex matter, as studies show that students often feel intimidated by feedback and may only accept feedback selectively, so as to pass their assessment or course. This article reports on the experiences of radiography students regarding summative clinical assessment feedback. METHODS: A qualitative, exploratory, descriptive, and contextual research design was used. Data were gathered from radiography students at one higher education institution in South Africa who were registered in year three and year four of a four-year professional Diagnostic Radiography degree. Five semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted, with 26 participants in total. Focus group interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded using Tesch's data analysis method. RESULTS: Two principle themes emerged from the data analysis. Theme 1 unpacked whether radiography students viewed the assessor as an ally or foe. It was found that various assessor-related characteristics influenced radiography students receptivity towards feedback and this was related to how they viewed the assessor. Theme 2 concerned the radiography students' perceptions of the key elements influencing the nature of a feedback process. These elements were influenced primarily by the assessor, but the attitudes of radiography students towards the feedback process were also important. CONCLUSION: Radiography students reported various positive experiences regarding assessor feedback during the summative clinical assessments. However, they were also dissatisfied with numerous aspects of how the assessors provided feedback often viewing the assessor as one who is a foe or who is opposed to their success. Subsequently the negative aspects of the feedback process hampered the learning experience of the participants. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Awareness and the development of feedback skills for assessors and radiography students would be beneficial to the learning process. Radiography students, the radiography profession and ultimately the patients would benefit from the effects of effective feedback.

Improving Satisfaction With Operating Room Feedback: An Effective, Low-Profile, No-Cost Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and implement an effective and minimally invasive tool to enhance formative and goal specific feedback for general surgery residents in the operating room. DESIGN: Placards reminding surgical faculty and residents to engage in goal directed feedback were installed at scrub sinks outside of every operating room. The purpose was to encourage both residents and faculty to agree on a learning goal before the case, teach and learn that goal during the case, and discuss progress and next steps after the case. Preintervention and postintervention questionnaires were administered via Qualtrics Online Survey Software to all general surgery residents and core faculty members. SETTING: Placards were installed at every scrub sink across all 4 hospitals associated with Yale School of Medicine General Surgery Residency over a 6-month time period. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents included general surgery residents and core surgical faculty of the Yale School of Medicine General Surgery Residency. RESULTS: Following the intervention, residents reported a statistically significant increase in preoperative discussion of learning goals, debriefing about specific learning goals postoperatively, and overall satisfaction with feedback (p < 0.01). Conversely, faculty perception of feedback did not change as a result of the intervention with faculty consistently reporting higher rates of preoperative learning goal discussions, providing goal specific feedback intraoperatively, and debriefing postoperatively when compared to residents (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Formative feedback reminder placards placed near operating rooms serve as a low-profile, no-cost intervention to improve general surgery resident satisfaction with operative feedback and increase the perceived rate of goal specific feedback discussions both pre- and postoperatively.

Feedback in a clinical setting: A way forward to enhance student's learning through constructive feedback.

Feedback is considered as a dynamic process in which information about the observed performance is used to promote the desirable behaviour and correct the negative ones. The importance of feedback is widely acknowledged, but still there seems to be inconsistency in the amount, type and timing of feedback received from the clinical faculty. No significant effort has been put forward from the educator end to empower the learners with the skills of receiving and using the feedback effectively. Some institutions conduct faculty development workshops and courses to facilitate the clinicians on how best to deliver constructive feedback to the learners. Despite of all these struggles learners are not fully satisfied with the quality of feedback received from their busy clinicians. The aim of this paper is to highlight what actually feedback is, type and structure of feedback, the essential components of a constructive feedback, benefits of providing feedback, barriers affecting the provision of timely feedback and different models used for providing feedback. The ultimate purpose of this paper is to provide sufficient information to the clinical directors that there is a need to establish a robust system for giving feedback to learners and to inform all the clinical educators with the skills required to provide constructive feedback to their learners. For the literature review, we had used the key words glossary as: Feedback, constructive feedback, barriers to feedback, principles of constructive feedback, Models of feedback, reflection, self-assessment and clinical practice etc. The data bases for the search include: Cardiff University library catalogue, Pub Med, Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge and Science direct.