Clinical teaching performance improvement of faculty in residency training: A prospective cohort study

作     者：van der Leeuw, Renee M. Boerebach, Benjamin C. M. Lombarts, Kiki M. J. M. H. Heineman, Maas Jan Arah, Onyebuchi A. 

作者机构：Univ Amsterdam Profess Performance Res Grp Ctr Evidence Based Educ Acad Med Ctr NL-1012 WX Amsterdam Netherlands Univ Amsterdam Inst Res Dept NL-1012 WX Amsterdam Netherlands Univ Amsterdam NL-1012 WX Amsterdam Netherlands Univ Calif Los Angeles Dept Epidemiol Fielding Sch Publ Health Los Angeles CA 90024 USA 

出 版 物：《MEDICAL TEACHER》 (医学教师)

年 卷 期：2016年第38卷第5期

页      面：464-470页

核心收录：

学科分类：12[管理学] 1204[管理学-公共管理] 0401[教育学-教育学] 120402[管理学-社会医学与卫生事业管理(可授管理学、医学学位)] 1004[医学-公共卫生与预防医学(可授医学、理学学位)] 10[医学] 

基　　金：Dutch Ministry of Health Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam Faculty of Health and Life Sciences of the University of Maastricht Veni career grant - Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) [916.96.059] 

主　　题：Teacher evaluation PSYCHOLOGY Student evaluation of teachers Feedback (Psychology) Teacher development Professional education Teaching -- Evaluation Confidence intervals Hospital medical staff Longitudinal method Medical schools -- Faculty Medical cooperation Medicine -- Study & teaching Probability theory Regression analysis Research Research -- Finance Scale analysis (Psychology) Self-evaluation Statistics Variables (Mathematics) Data analysis Teaching methods Data analysis -- Software Medical coding Medical teaching personnel Residents (Medicine) -- Attitudes Clinical competence -- Study & teaching 

摘      要：Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate how aspects of a teaching performance evaluation system may affect faculty s teaching performance improvement as perceived by residents over time. Methods: Prospective multicenter cohort study conducted in The Netherlands between 1 September 2008 and 1 February 2013. Nine hundred and one residents and 1068 faculty of 65 teaching programs in 16 hospitals were invited to annually (self-) evaluate teaching performance using the validated, specialty-specific System for Evaluation of Teaching Qualities (SETQ). We used multivariable adjusted generalized estimating equations to analyze the effects of (i) residents numerical feedback, (ii) narrative feedback, and (iii) faculty s participation in self-evaluation on residents perception of faculty s teaching performance improvement. Results: The average response rate over three years was 69% for faculty and 81% for residents. Higher numerical feedback scores were associated with residents rating faculty as having improved their teaching performance one year following the first measurement (regression coefficient, b: 0.077;95% CI: 0.002-0.151;p=0.045), but not after the second wave of receiving feedback and evaluating improvement. Receiving more suggestions for improvement was associated with improved teaching performance in subsequent years. Conclusions: Evaluation systems on clinical teaching performance appear helpful in enhancing teaching performance in residency training programs. High performing teachers also appear to improve in the perception of the residents.