Context, time, and building relationships: bringing in situ feedback into the conversation

The Case for Feedback-in-Practice as a Topic of Educational Scholarship

The importance of clinical performance feedback is well established and the factors relevant to its effectiveness widely recognized, yet feedback continues to play out in problematic ways. For example, learning culture modifications shown to facilitate feedback have not seen widespread adoption, and the learner-educator interactions prescribed by research rarely occur organically. Nevertheless, medical learners achieve clinical competence, suggesting a need to expand educational scholarship on this topic to better account for learner growth. This Scholarly Perspective argues for a more extensive exploration of feedback as an educational activity embedded in clinical practice , where joint clinical work that involves an educator and learner provides a locus for feedback in the midst of performance. In these clinically embedded feedback episodes, learning and performance goals are constrained by the task at hand, and the educator guides the learner in collaboratively identifying problematic elements, naming and reframing the source of challenge, and extrapolating implications for further action. In jointly conducting clinical tasks, educators and learners may frequently engage in feedback interactions that are both aligned with workplace realities and consistent with current theoretical understanding of what feedback is. However, feedback embedded in practice may be challenged by personal, social, and organizational factors that affect learners' participation in workplace activity. This Scholarly Perspective aims to provide a conceptual framework that helps educators and learners be more intentional about and fully participatory in this important educational activity. By topicalizing this feedback-in-practice and exploring its integration with the more commonly foregrounded feedback-on-practice , future educational scholarship may achieve optimal benefit to learners, educators, and clinical practice.

Feedback on feedback: a two-way street between residents and preceptors

BACKGROUND

Workplace-based assessment (WBA), foundational to competency-based medical education, relies on preceptors providing feedback to residents. Preceptors however get little timely, formative, specific, actionable feedback on the effectiveness of that feedback. Our study aimed to identify useful qualities of feedback for family medicine residents and to inform improving feedback-giving skills for preceptors in PGME training program.

METHODS

This study employed a two-phase exploratory design. Phase 1 collected qualitative data from preceptor feedback given to residents through Field Notes (FNs) and quantitative data from residents who provided feedback to preceptor about the quality of the feedback given. Phase 2 employed focus groups to explore ways in which residents are willing to provide preceptors with constructive feedback about the quality of the feedback they receive. Descriptive statistics and a thematic approach were used for data analysis.

FINDINGS

We collected 22 FNs identified by residents as being impactful to their learning; analysis of these FNs resulted in five themes. Functionality was then added to the electronic FNs allowing residents to indicate impactful feedback with a "Thumbs Up" icon. Over one year, 895 out of 8,496 FNs (11%) had a "Thumbs up" added, divided into reasons of: confirmation of learning (28.6%), practice improvement (21.2%), new learning (18.8%), motivation (17.7%), and evoking reflection (13.7%). Two focus groups (12 residents, convenience sampling) explored residents' perception of constructive feedback and willingness to also provide constructive feedback to preceptors.

CONCLUSION

Adding constructive feedback to existing positive feedback choices will provide preceptors with holistic information about the impact of their feedback on learners, which, in turn, should allow them to provide more effective feedback to learners. However, power differential, relationship impact, and institutional support were concerns for residents that would need to be addressed for this to be optimally operationalized.

Unearthing Faculty and Trainee Perspectives of Feedback in Internal Medicine: the Oral Case Presentation as a Model

BACKGROUND

The case presentation is a fundamental activity used in both patient care and trainee education, partly due to feedback from supervisor to trainee. Although feedback in medical education is well studied, prior studies have not focused on the perceptions of feedback by Internal Medicine supervisors and trainees as it relates to clinical activities like the case presentation.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight Internal Medicine physicians, and 18 Internal Medicine trainees (5 medical students, 13 residents) at the University of Toronto. Purposive sampling was used. Interviews were conducted and coded iteratively within a constructivist grounded theory approach until saturation was reached.

RESULTS

Supervisors and trainees recognized feedback as an important part of the case presentation that can be (1) explicit, labeled feedback or (2) implicit, unlabeled feedback. Both trainees and supervisors perceived that not enough feedback occurs, likely stemming from a hesitancy by supervisors to label implicit feedback, calling it an interruption instead. Although trainees were keenly aware of non-verbal feedback from their supervisors as implicit feedback, they often interpreted explicit constructive feedback negatively. Interestingly, the same feedback from senior residents was regarded as highly educational, as it was uncoupled from assessment.

CONCLUSION

Feedback occurs more frequently in case presentations than previously described, particularly in an implicit, unlabeled format. Even though under-recognized, trainees identify and utilize implicit feedback from supervisors, and coaching from senior residents, to develop learned behaviors. This is reassuring in the age of Competency-Based Medical Education, as feedback has an essential role in workplace-based assessment and promotion.

The Feedback Tango: An Integrative Review and Analysis of the Content of the Teacher-Learner Feedback Exchange

PURPOSE

To conduct an integrative review and analysis of the literature on the content of feedback to learners in medical education.

METHOD

Following completion of a scoping review in 2016, the authors analyzed a subset of articles published through 2015 describing the analysis of feedback exchange content in various contexts: audiotapes, clinical examination, feedback cards, multisource feedback, videotapes, and written feedback. Two reviewers extracted data from these articles and identified common themes.

RESULTS

Of the 51 included articles, about half (49%) were published since 2011. Most involved medical students (43%) or residents (43%). A leniency bias was noted in many (37%), as there was frequently reluctance to provide constructive feedback. More than one-quarter (29%) indicated the feedback was low in quality (e.g., too general, limited amount, no action plans). Some (16%) indicated faculty dominated conversations, did not use feedback forms appropriately, or provided inadequate feedback, even after training. Multiple feedback tools were used, with some articles (14%) describing varying degrees of use, completion, or legibility. Some articles (14%) noted the impact of the gender of the feedback provider or learner.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings reveal that the exchange of feedback is troubled by low-quality feedback, leniency bias, faculty deficient in feedback competencies, challenges with multiple feedback tools, and gender impacts. Using the tango dance form as a metaphor for this dynamic partnership, the authors recommend ways to improve feedback for teachers and learners willing to partner with each other and engage in the complexities of the feedback exchange.

Supervisor-trainee continuity and the quality of work-based assessments

CONTEXT

Work-based assessments (WBAs) represent an increasingly important means of reporting expert judgements of trainee competence in clinical practice. However, the quality of WBAs completed by clinical supervisors is of concern. The episodic and fragmented interaction that often occurs between supervisors and trainees has been proposed as a barrier to the completion of high-quality WBAs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary purpose of this study was to determine the effect of supervisor-trainee continuity on the quality of assessments documented on daily encounter cards (DECs), a common form of WBA. The relationship between trainee performance and DEC quality was also examined.

METHODS

Daily encounter cards representing three differing degrees of supervisor-trainee continuity (low, intermediate, high) were scored by two raters using the Completed Clinical Evaluation Report Rating (CCERR), a previously published nine-item quantitative measure of DEC quality. An analysis of variance (anova) was performed to compare mean CCERR scores among the three groups. Linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between resident performance and DEC quality.

RESULTS

Differences in mean CCERR scores were observed between the three continuity groups (p = 0.02); however, the magnitude of the absolute differences was small (partial eta-squared = 0.03) and not educationally meaningful. Linear regression analysis demonstrated a significant inverse relationship between resident performance and CCERR score (p < 0.001, r²  = 0.18). This inverse relationship was observed in both groups representing on-service residents (p = 0.001, r²  = 0.25; p = 0.04, r²  = 0.19), but not in the Off-service group (p = 0.62, r²  = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Supervisor-trainee continuity did not have an educationally meaningful influence on the quality of assessments documented on DECs. However, resident performance was found to affect assessor behaviours in the On-service group, whereas DEC quality remained poor regardless of performance in the Off-service group. The findings suggest that greater attention should be given to determining ways of improving the quality of assessments reported for off-service residents, as well as for those residents demonstrating appropriate clinical competence progression.