Evaluating the Anesthesiology Residents’ Performance, Using a Modified 360-degree Assessment Questionnaire in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Shiraz Anesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Educational Development Office, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of English language, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

4 Statistics and Information Office, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Background: In the recent decades, worldwide attentions were increased in many countries for example North America and Europe to evaluate physician’s performance and become a necessity. The purpose of this study was to translate and determine the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the 360-degree assessment for anesthesiology residents. It consists of different domains to measure the general capabilities including communication and interpersonal skills, professionalism and residents’ clinical care skills.
Methods: In this study, we used the questionnaire developed by Calgary University in Canada for the psychometric features. All second and third year residents who were actively engaged in anesthetic induction and were in close contact with their professors were chosen. The raters included five groups of faculty members, operation room staff (senior anesthetic technicians and recovery room nurses), residents’ colleagues, patients and residents themselves (self-assessment).
Results: Cronbach's alpha coefficient for each questionnaire was over 0.80. Regarding the construct validity, the correlation between the items constituting each domain and the domain itself was over 0.40. We found a statistically significant difference between the colleagues and patients’ viewpoints. Considering clinical care, we also found a statistically significant difference between the faculty members and patients’ viewpoints. No statistically significant difference was found between the raters’ viewpoints.
Conclusion: The present study showed that the Persian version of 360-degree scale is a practical and effective assessment tool with proper reliability and validity to measure the residents’ competence. It is suggested to be applied in other specialties to get more definite results.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Neshatavar R, Amini  M, Takmil  F, Tabei  Z, Zare  N, Bazrafkan  L. Using a modified 360° multisource feedback model to evaluate surgery residents in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Future Med Educ J. 2017; 7(1): 30-34.
  2. Qu B, Zhao Y, Sun B. Evaluation of residents in professionalism and communication skills in south China. Saudi Med J. 2010; 3(11).1260-65.
  3. Donnon T, Al Ansari A, Al Alawi S, Violato C. The reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment: A systematic review. Acad Med. 2014; 89(3). 511-16.
  4. Rademacher R, Simpsond D, Marcdante K. Critical incidents as a technique for teaching professionalism. Med Teach. 2010; 32(3): 244-49.
  5. Maylett T. 360 Degree feedback revisited: The transition from development to appraisal. Compens Benefits Rev. 2009; 300-7.
  6. Nakhaee N, Saeed A R. 360-degree evaluation method in clinical evaluation of residents: a pilot study on feasibility, validity and reliability. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2011; 7(2):99-103.
  7. Dubinskey I, Jenning K, Greengarten M. 360 Degree physician performance assessment. Healthc Q. 2010; 13(2): 71-76.
  8. Chandler N, Henderson G, Park B. Use of a 360-Degree evaluation in the outpatient setting: The usefulness of nurse, faculty, patient/family and resident self-evaluation. J Grad Med Educ. 2010; 2(3): 430-34.
  9. Chisholm A, Askham J. What do you think of your doctor? A review of questionnaires for gathering patients’ feedback on their doctor. Oxford: Picker Institute Europe; 2006.
  10. Donnon T, Ansari A, AlawiS A and Violato C. The reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment: a systematic review. Acad Med. 2014; 89(3):511-16.
  11. Bashook PG. Best practices for assessing competence and performance of the behavioral health workforce. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2005; 32(5/6): 563-92.
  12. Wood J, Colins J, Burnside Es, Albanese MA. Patient, faculty and self-assessment of radiology performance: A 360-degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/ communication skills. Acad Radiol. 2004; 11: 931-39.
  13. Meng LI, Metro DG, Patel RM. Evaluation professionalism and interpersonal and communication skills: implementing a 360- degree evaluation instrument in an anesthesiology residency program. J Grad Med Educ. 2009; 1(2): 216-20.
  14. Neshatavar R. A 360-degree assessment on surgery residents in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences [MSc thesis]. Shiraz: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences; 2012.
  15. Lockyer J, Violato C, Fidler H. A multisource feedback program for anesthesiology. Can J Anesth. 2006; 53: 33–39.
  16. Jaruratanasirikul S, KhotchasingW. Using a 360-degree assessment of pediatric residency training: experience at Prince of Songkla University, Thailand. Asian Biomedicine 8(1). 2014; 105-110.
  17. Lagoo J, Berry WR, Miller K, Neal BJ, Sato L, Lillemoe KD, et al. Multisource evaluation of surgeon behavior is associated with malpractice claims. Ann Surg. 2018; 23(10): Epub ahead of print.
  18. Jani H, Narmawala W, Ganjiwale J. Evaluation of competencies related to personal attributes of resident doctors by 360 degree. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017; 11(6): 9-11.
  19. Berger JS, Pan E, Thomas J. A randomized, controlled crossover study to discern the value of 360-degree versus traditional, faculty-only evaluation for performance improvement of anesthesiology residents. J Educ Perioper Med. 2009; 11(2):E053.
Future of Medical Education Journal
Volume 9, Issue 2
Summer
June 2019
Pages 28-32

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics