eCite Digital Repository

Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education

Citation

Barr, J and Ogden, K and Robertson, I and Martin, J, Exploring how differently patients and clinical tutors see the same consultation: building evidence for inclusion of real patient feedback in medical education, BMC Medical Education, 21 pp. 1-9. ISSN 1472-6920 (2021) [Refereed Article]


Preview
PDF
558Kb
  

Copyright Statement

Copyright The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

DOI: doi:10.1186/s12909-021-02654-3

Abstract

Background: Undergraduate medical education recognises that patient feedback is potentially valuable for student learning and development as a component of multi-source feedback. However greater exploration of how patient feedback perspectives differ to clinical educators is required for curriculum development and improving student feedback literacy. This study aimed to determine how two sources of feedback, patients and clinical tutors, compare on the same patient-centred, interpersonal criteria.

Methods: A patient feedback instrument designed for the undergraduate medical education setting was used to compare patientsí feedback with clinical tutorsí feedback following a student-patient consultation in the learning context. Assessments from 222 learning consultations involving 40 medical students were collected. Descriptive statistics for tutors and patients for each question were calculated and correlations between patient and tutor were explored using Spearmanís rank-order correlation. Mixed effects ordered logistic regression was used to compare each question with an overall rating for tutor and patients in addition to comparing patient with tutor ratings.

Results: Clinical tutor and patient assessments had a weak but significant positive correlation in all areas except questions related to respect and concern. When making judgements compared with overall assessment, patientsí ratings of respect, concern, communication and being understood in the consultation have a greater effect. After eliminating the effect of generally higher ratings by patients compared with tutors using comparative ordered logistic regression, patients rated students relatively less competent in areas of personal interaction.

Conclusion: This study provides insight about patient feedback, which is required to continue improving the use and acceptability of this multisource feedback to students as a valuable component of their social learning environment. We have revealed the different perspective-specific judgement that patients bring to feedback. This finding contributes to building respect for patient feedback through greater understanding of the elements of consultations for which patients can discriminate performance.

Item Details

Item Type:Refereed Article
Keywords:patient feedback, medical education, multisource feedback
Research Division:Education
Research Group:Curriculum and pedagogy
Research Field:Medicine, nursing and health curriculum and pedagogy
Objective Division:Education and Training
Objective Group:Learner and learning
Objective Field:Higher education
UTAS Author:Barr, J (Mrs Jenny Barr)
UTAS Author:Ogden, K (Dr Kathryn Ogden)
UTAS Author:Robertson, I (Dr Iain Robertson)
ID Code:144396
Year Published:2021
Deposited By:Medicine
Deposited On:2021-05-20
Last Modified:2021-06-30
Downloads:4 View Download Statistics

Repository Staff Only: item control page