Sharing Reflections on Multisource Feedback in a Peer Group Setting: Stimulating Physicians' Professional Performance and Development

The WellNext Scan: Validity evidence of a new team-based tool to map and support physicians' well-being in the clinical working context

Occupational well-being is inherent to physicians' professional performance and is indispensable for a cost-effective, robust healthcare system and excellent patient outcomes. Increasing numbers of physicians with symptoms of burnout, depression, and other health issues are demonstrating the need to foster and maintain physicians' well-being. Assessing physicians' well-being, occupational demands, and resources can help create more supportive and health-promoting working environments. The WellNext Scan (WNS) is a 46-item questionnaire developed to assess (i) physicians' well-being and (ii) relevant factors related to physicians' clinical working environment. We collected data to investigate the validity and reliability of the WNS using a non-randomized, multicenter, cross-sectional survey of 467 physicians (staff, residents, doctors not in training, and fellows) from 17 departments in academic and non-academic teaching medical centers in the Netherlands. Exploratory factor analysis detected three composite scales of well-being (energy and work enjoyment, meaning, and patient-related disengagement) and five explanatory factors (supportive team culture, efficiency of practice, job control and team-based well-being practices, resilience, and self-kindness). Pearson's correlations, item-total and inter-scale correlations, and Cronbach's alphas demonstrated good construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the scales (α: 0.67-0.90; item-total correlations: 0.33-0.84; inter-scale correlations: 0.19-0.62). Overall, the WNS appears to yield reliable and valid data and is now available as a supportive tool for meaningful team-based conversations aimed at improving physician well-being.

A systematic scoping review of group reflection in medical education

BACKGROUND

Reviewing experiences and recognizing the impact of personal and professional views and emotions upon conduct shapes a physician's professional and personal development, molding their professional identity formation (PIF). Poor appreciation on the role of reflection, shortages in trained tutors and inadequate 'protected time' for reflections in packed medical curricula has hindered its integration into medical education. Group reflection could be a viable alternative to individual reflections; however, this nascent practice requires further study.

METHODS

A Systematic Evidence Based Approach guided Systematic Scoping Review (SSR in SEBA) was adopted to guide and structure a review of group reflections in medical education. Independent searches of articles published between 1st January 2000 and 30th June 2022 in bibliographic and grey literature databases were carried out. Included articles were analysed separately using thematic and content analysis, and combined into categories and themes. The themes/categories created were compared with the tabulated summaries of included articles to create domains that framed the synthesis of the discussion.

RESULTS

1141 abstracts were reviewed, 193 full-text articles were appraised and 66 articles were included and the domains identified were theories; indications; types; structure; and benefits and challenges of group reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Scaffolded by current approaches to individual reflections and theories and inculcated with nuanced adaptations from other medical practices, this SSR in SEBA suggests that structured group reflections may fill current gaps in training. However, design and assessment of the evidence-based structuring of group reflections proposed here must be the focus of future study.

A mixed-method approach to examining the experiences of allied health clinicians and managers of the performance, appraisal and development framework in a regional health care service

INTRODUCTION

Evaluating employee performance is important for organisational success however, limited research exists across the allied health workforce.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated allied health clinician and manager experiences and perceptions of the appropriateness of the performance and development (PAD) framework.

DESIGN

A mixed methods design with purposive sampling was conducted in a medium size hospital and health service in regional Queensland to investigate the appropriateness of the PAD framework. A 29 item online survey collected likert scale and open ended responses. Identified respondents also completed a semi-structured interview. Aggregated satisfaction scores identifying PAD alignment, processes, education, resources and perceptions were analysed to identify organisational PAD appropriateness. Themes from interviews provided concurrent experiential data.

FINDINGS

Eighty-five respondents completed the online survey and 20 interviews were conducted. A Chi-Square Goodness of Fit test revealed a significant (p < 0.05) clinician (n = 75) response of moderate dissatisfaction (36%) for the PAD framework, while managers (n = 10) were neither dissatisfied nor satisfied (50%) or moderately satisfied (40%). Clinician aggregated agreement responses were significantly (p < 0.05) higher for PAD alignment (45%), processes (63%), education (49%) and lower for feedback (33%) and resources (28%). Manager aggregated agreement responses were high for PAD alignment (85%), processes (55%), education (57%), feedback (65%) and perceptions (50%). Interviews (n = 20) revealed three themes: uncertainty around PAD framework; expectations for experienced leadership and importance of discipline specific knowledge.

DISCUSSION

This study draws on both clinician and manager input to assess the overall PAD framework with responses favouring clinician dissatisfaction to the current process.

CONCLUSION

The PAD framework is valuable for staff development when there is positive rapport and discipline alignment between both clinician and manager. Successful staff appraisals require efficient and appropriate documentation that promotes individual development, clinical performance and organisational priorities.

Linking leadership development programs for physicians with organization-level outcomes: a realist review

BACKGROUND

Hospitals invest in Leadership Development Programs (LDPs) for physicians, assuming they benefit the organization's performance. Researchers have listed the advantages of LDPs, but knowledge of how and why organization-level outcomes are achieved is missing.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how, why and under which circumstances LDPs for physicians can impact organization-level outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a realist review, following the RAMESES guidelines. Scientific articles and grey literature published between January 2010 and March 2021 evaluating a leadership intervention for physicians in the hospital setting were considered for inclusion. The following databases were searched: Medline, PsycInfo, ERIC, Web of Science, and Academic Search Premier. Based on the included documents, we developed a LDP middle-range program theory (MRPT) consisting of Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs) describing how specific contexts (C) trigger certain mechanisms (M) to generate organization-level outcomes (O).

RESULTS

In total, 3904 titles and abstracts and, subsequently, 100 full-text documents were inspected; 38 documents with LDPs from multiple countries informed our MRPT. The MRPT includes five CMOs that describe how LDPs can impact the organization-level outcomes categories 'culture', 'quality improvement', and 'the leadership pipeline': 'Acquiring self-insight and people skills (CMO1)', 'Intentionally building professional networks (CMO2)', 'Supporting quality improvement projects (CMO3)', 'Tailored LDP content prepares physicians (CMO4)', and 'Valuing physician leaders and organizational commitment (CMO5)'. Culture was the outcome of CMO1 and CMO2, quality improvement of CMO2 and CMO3, and the leadership pipeline of CMO2, CMO4, and CMO5. These CMOs operated within an overarching context, the leadership ecosystem, that determined realizing and sustaining organization-level outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

LDPs benefit organization-level outcomes through multiple mechanisms. Creating the contexts to trigger these mechanisms depends on the resources invested in LDPs and adequately supporting physicians. LDP providers can use the presented MRPT to guide the development of LDPs when aiming for specific organization-level outcomes.

Designing a system for performance appraisal: balancing physicians' accountability and professional development

BACKGROUND

In many healthcare systems, physicians are accustomed to periodically participate in individual performance appraisals to guide their professional development. For the purpose of revalidation, or maintenance of certification, they need to demonstrate that they have engaged with the outcomes of these appraisals. The combination of taking ownership in professional development and meeting accountability requirements may cause undesirable interference of purposes. To support physicians in their professional development, new Dutch legislation requires that they discuss their performance data with a non-hierarchical (peer)coach and draft a personal development plan. In this study, we report on the design of this system for performance appraisal in a Dutch academic medical center.

METHODS

Using a design-based research approach, a hospital-based research group had the lead in drafting and implementing a performance appraisal protocol, selecting a multisource feedback tool, co-developing and piloting a coaching approach, implementing a planning tool, recruiting peer coaches and facilitating their training and peer group debriefings.

RESULTS

The system consisted of a two-hour peer-to-peer conversation based on the principles of appreciative inquiry and solution-focused coaching. Sessions were rated as highly motivating, development-oriented, concrete and valuable. Peer coaches were considered suitable, although occasionally physicians preferred a professional coach because of their expertise. The system honored both accountability and professional development purposes. By integrating the performance appraisal system with an already existing internal performance system, physicians were enabled to openly and safely discuss their professional development with a peer, while also being supported by their superior in their self-defined developmental goals. Although the peer-to-peer conversation was mandatory and participation in the process was documented, it was up to the physician whether or not to share its results with others, including their superior.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of mandatory revalidation, professional development can be supported when the appraisal process involves three characteristics: the appraisal process is appreciative and explores developmental opportunities; coaches are trustworthy and skilled; and the physician has control over the disclosure of the appraisal output. Although the peer-to-peer conversations were positively evaluated, the effects on physicians' professional development have yet to be investigated in longitudinal research designs.