Effectiveness of a modified Balint group process on empathy and psychological skills employing Kirkpatrick's evaluation framework.
Balint
Empathy
Family medicine
Post-graduate training
Journal
PeerJ
ISSN: 2167-8359
Titre abrégé: PeerJ
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101603425
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
29
11
2022
accepted:
03
04
2023
medline:
25
7
2023
pubmed:
24
7
2023
entrez:
24
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate, using Kirkpatrick's evaluation model, a modified Balint group (BG) by adding 5-10 min at the end of the session, where the facilitators will debrief the residents about critical themes mentioned in the session. A quasi-experimental study with a mixed-method design was conducted among family medicine residents over 1 year, using focus groups and validated tools filled by residents and their corresponding patients. The residents' empathy through self and patient evaluation, psychological skills, and satisfaction with the educational activity were measured. The focus group revealed that the residents were aware of the change and considered it a closure to the encounter, helping decrease some uncertainty. Most of the residents did not consider the change helpful. Using validated instruments, BG was ineffective at improving the residents' empathy and psychological skills. There was a statistically significant main effect of time on Psychological Medicine Inventory (PMI) scores, F (1,13) = 7.709, Debriefing at the end of BG by the facilitators about key themes may help give the residents closure, decrease the uncertainty, and make them more aware of their feelings. Nevertheless, Balint groups are still not very well accepted by the residents, and they prefer direct feedback and support groups.
Sections du résumé
Background
To evaluate, using Kirkpatrick's evaluation model, a modified Balint group (BG) by adding 5-10 min at the end of the session, where the facilitators will debrief the residents about critical themes mentioned in the session.
Methods
A quasi-experimental study with a mixed-method design was conducted among family medicine residents over 1 year, using focus groups and validated tools filled by residents and their corresponding patients. The residents' empathy through self and patient evaluation, psychological skills, and satisfaction with the educational activity were measured.
Results
The focus group revealed that the residents were aware of the change and considered it a closure to the encounter, helping decrease some uncertainty. Most of the residents did not consider the change helpful. Using validated instruments, BG was ineffective at improving the residents' empathy and psychological skills. There was a statistically significant main effect of time on Psychological Medicine Inventory (PMI) scores, F (1,13) = 7.709,
Conclusion
Debriefing at the end of BG by the facilitators about key themes may help give the residents closure, decrease the uncertainty, and make them more aware of their feelings. Nevertheless, Balint groups are still not very well accepted by the residents, and they prefer direct feedback and support groups.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37483957
doi: 10.7717/peerj.15279
pii: 15279
pmc: PMC10362841
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e15279Informations de copyright
© 2023 Antoun et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Jumana Antoun is an Academic Editor for PeerJ.
Références
Fam Med. 2007 Jul-Aug;39(7):495-7
pubmed: 17602324
Patient Educ Couns. 2004 Nov;55(2):230-5
pubmed: 15530759
BMC Nurs. 2017 Nov 25;16:71
pubmed: 29204104
Fam Med. 1999 Mar;31(3):182-6
pubmed: 10086254
Int J Psychiatry Med. 2019 Jan;54(1):3-10
pubmed: 30091373
Med Educ. 2022 Jan;56(1):127-136
pubmed: 34463357
J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Jun 27;8:124
pubmed: 31334276
Fam Med. 2004 Feb;36(2):114-22
pubmed: 14872358
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Jul;72(1):5-11
pubmed: 18295432
J Grad Med Educ. 2009 Dec;1(2):231-5
pubmed: 21975984
Fam Pract. 2014 Dec;31(6):733-8
pubmed: 25320058
BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 25;9(6):e029356
pubmed: 31243037
Br J Gen Pract. 2010 Nov;60(580):808-14
pubmed: 21062547
Fam Pract Res J. 1988 Summer;7(4):236-44
pubmed: 3252699
Lancet. 1955 Apr 2;268(6866):683-8
pubmed: 14354967
J Psychosom Res. 2014 May;76(5):426-9
pubmed: 24745786
PLoS One. 2018 May 31;13(5):e0198488
pubmed: 29852021
J Psychosom Res. 2017 Dec;103:102-107
pubmed: 29167035
J Cancer Educ. 2012 Dec;27(4):786-9
pubmed: 22923383
Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Jun;98(6):685-94
pubmed: 25681874