The SOAP Feedback Training Program.

Humans Child Feedback Retrospective Studies Educational Measurement Program Development Clinical Competence Faculty, Nursing

Journal

The clinical teacher
ISSN: 1743-498X
Titre abrégé: Clin Teach
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101227511

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2023
Historique:
received: 04 08 2022
accepted: 09 07 2023
medline: 22 11 2023
pubmed: 30 8 2023
entrez: 30 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Accessible and efficient opportunities for health professional faculty to hone feedback skills are limited. In addition, feedback models to apply to the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) setting are lacking. Annually, paediatric interns from Children's National Hospital and Walter Reed National Military Medical Center participate in an OSCE, which includes faculty observation and immediate feedback to trainees. In 2018, we incorporated the subjective, objective, assessment, plan (SOAP) Feedback Training Program during 20 min of the pre-OSCE faculty orientation. The SOAP Feedback Training Program introduced the SOAP feedback model (subjective, objective, assessment, plan), facilitated practice in pairs and distributed a cognitive aid referencing the model. We evaluated the quality of faculty feedback exchanges during the 2018 OSCE via retrospective video review using the Direct Observation of Clinical Skills Feedback Scale (DOCS-FBS). We compared the results to the 2015 initial evaluation and used focus groups to understand how and why faculty feedback changed. Comparison of the initial evaluation to the post-SOAP Feedback Training Program intervention data using a Wilcoxon signed rank test showed statistically significant improvement in six of eight feedback items on the DOCS-FBS. Causal coding of focus group transcripts revealed that the SOAP Feedback Training Program evoked affective responses, reinforced prior practice in feedback delivery, improved feedback organisation and increased feedback delivery preparation. The SOAP Feedback Training Program is an effective intervention to teach the SOAP feedback model and improve faculty feedback quality in an OSCE setting. It is efficient and low resource, facilitating its potential use in settings beyond the OSCE.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Accessible and efficient opportunities for health professional faculty to hone feedback skills are limited. In addition, feedback models to apply to the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) setting are lacking.
APPROACH
Annually, paediatric interns from Children's National Hospital and Walter Reed National Military Medical Center participate in an OSCE, which includes faculty observation and immediate feedback to trainees. In 2018, we incorporated the subjective, objective, assessment, plan (SOAP) Feedback Training Program during 20 min of the pre-OSCE faculty orientation. The SOAP Feedback Training Program introduced the SOAP feedback model (subjective, objective, assessment, plan), facilitated practice in pairs and distributed a cognitive aid referencing the model. We evaluated the quality of faculty feedback exchanges during the 2018 OSCE via retrospective video review using the Direct Observation of Clinical Skills Feedback Scale (DOCS-FBS). We compared the results to the 2015 initial evaluation and used focus groups to understand how and why faculty feedback changed.
EVALUATION
Comparison of the initial evaluation to the post-SOAP Feedback Training Program intervention data using a Wilcoxon signed rank test showed statistically significant improvement in six of eight feedback items on the DOCS-FBS. Causal coding of focus group transcripts revealed that the SOAP Feedback Training Program evoked affective responses, reinforced prior practice in feedback delivery, improved feedback organisation and increased feedback delivery preparation.
IMPLICATIONS
The SOAP Feedback Training Program is an effective intervention to teach the SOAP feedback model and improve faculty feedback quality in an OSCE setting. It is efficient and low resource, facilitating its potential use in settings beyond the OSCE.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1111/tct.13611 PMID: 37646343
pubmed: 37646343
doi: 10.1111/tct.13611
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e13611

Subventions

Organisme : Foundation for the National Institutes of Health
ID : UL1TR001876
Organisme : Foundation for the National Institutes of Health
ID : KL2TR001877

Informations de copyright

© 2023 Association for the Study of Medical Education and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Hewson MG, Little ML. Giving feedback in medical education: verification of recommended techniques. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13(2):111-116. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00027.x
Krackov SK. Expanding the horizon for feedback. Med Teach. 2011;33(11):873-874. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.617797
Cantillon P, Sargeant J. Giving feedback in clinical settings. BMJ. 2008;337(nov10 2):a1961. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1961
Milan FB, Parish SJ, Reichgott MJ. A model for educational feedback based on clinical communication skills strategies: beyond the “feedback sandwich”. Teach Learn Med. 2006;18(1):42-47. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328015tlm1801_9
Chowdhury RR, Kalu G. Learning to give feedback in medical education. Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;6(4):243-247. https://doi.org/10.1576/toag.6.4.243.27023
Sargeant J, Lockyer J, Mann K, Holmboe E, Silver I, Armson H, et al. Facilitated reflective performance feedback: developing an evidence- and theory-based model that builds relationship, explores reactions and content, and coaches for performance change (R2C2). Acad Med. 2015;90(12):1698-1706. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000809
Hayes JR, Zeman J, Johnston B, Campbell N. Outpatient teaching and feedback skills workshop for resident physicians. MedEdPORTAL. 2020;31(16):10930. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10930
Lamba S, Nagurka R. Tool for documenting clinical point-of-care direct observation and formative feedback. MedEdPORTAL. 2015;11:10093. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10093
Schiller J, Hammoud M, Belmonte D, Englesbe M, Gelb D, Grum C, et al. Systematic direct observation of clinical skills in the clinical year. MedEdPORTAL. 2014;10:9712. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9712
Nikels SM, Brandenburg S. Multi-source evaluation of resident physicians. MedEdPORTAL. 2012;8:9249. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9249
Hall C, Peleva E, Vithlani RH, Shah S, Bashyam M, Ramadas M, et al. FEEDBK: a novel approach for providing feedback. Clin Teach. 2020;17(1):76-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13026
Blatt B, Confessore S, Kallenberg G, Greenberg L. Verbal interaction analysis: viewing feedback through a different lens. Teach Learn Med. 2008;20(4):329-333. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401330802384789
Baumgartner S, Agrawal D, Greenberg L. The enhanced brief structured observation model: efficiently assess trainee competence and provide feedback. MedEdPORTAL. 2021;17:11153. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.11153
Haji F, Morin MP, Parker K. Rethinking programme evaluation in health professions education: beyond ‘did it work?’. Med Educ. 2013;47(4):342-351. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12091
Abir G, Austin N, Seligman KM, Burian BK, Goldhaber-Fiebert SN. Cognitive aids in obstetric units: design, implementation, and use. Anesth Analg. 2020;130(5):1341-1350. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000004354
Kolb DA. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1984. p. 20-38.
Halman S, Dudek N, Wood T, Pugh D, Touchie C, McAleer S, et al. Direct observation of clinical skills feedback scale: development and validity evidence. Teach Learn Med. 2016;28(4):385-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2016.1186552
Kamberelis G, Dimitriadis G. Focus groups: contingent articulations of pedagogy, politics, and inquiry. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors The Sage handbook of qualitative research 4th ed. xvi Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. p. 766.
Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers 3E Third ed. xiv Los Angeles; London: SAGE; 2016. p. 339.
Mann K, MacLeod A. Constructivism: learning theories and approaches to research. In: Cleland J, Durning SJ, eds. Researching medical education. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell; 2015. 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118838983.ch6

Auteurs

Binny Chokshi (B)

Department of Pediatrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Washington, District of Colombia, USA.
ORCID: 0000-0001-9670-910X

Alexis Battista (A)

The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Jerusalem Merkebu (J)

The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Shana Hansen (S)

Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Benjamin Blatt (B)

Department of Medicine, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Colombia, USA.

Joseph Lopreiato (J)

Department of Pediatrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Washington, District of Colombia, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Personnes › Tranches d'âge › Enfant › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Sciences de l'information › Analyse des systèmes › Recherche opérationnelle › Rétroaction › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Caractéristiques des études épidémiologiques › Études épidémiologiques › Études de cohortes › Études rétrospectives › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Éducation › Évaluation des acquis scolaires › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Administration des services de santé › Organisation et administration › Mise au point de programmes › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Qualité, accès, évaluation des soins de santé › Qualité des soins de santé › Compétence clinique › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.
questionsmedicales.fr › Établissements, main d'oeuvre et services de soins de santé › Personnel de santé › Corps enseignant et administratif de l'école d'infirmières › The SOAP Feedback Training Program.