Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Patient, faculty, and self-assessment of radiology resident performance: a 360-degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills.
Acad Radiol. 2004 Aug; 11(8):931-9.AR

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To develop and test the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a 360-degree evaluation to measure radiology resident competence in professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An evaluation form with 10 Likert-type items related to professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills was completed by a resident, supervising radiologist and patient after resident-patient interactions related to breast biopsy procedures. Residents were also evaluated by faculty, using an end-of-rotation global rating form. Residents, faculty, and technologists were queried regarding their reaction to the assessments after a 7-month period.

RESULTS

Fifty-six complete 360-degree data sets (range, 2-14 per resident) and seven rotational evaluations for seven residents were analyzed and compared. Internal consistency reliability estimates were 0.85, 0.86, and 0.87 for resident, patient, and faculty 360-degree evaluations, respectively. Correlations between resident-versus-patient, resident-versus-faculty, and patient-versus-faculty ratings for the 56 interactions were -0.06 (P =.64), 0.31 (P <.02), and 0.45 (P <.0006), respectively. Pearson correlation coefficients approached significant correlation (0.70) between the faculty global rating and patient 360-degree scores (P =.08) but not with faculty 360-degree scores. Residents and faculty felt that completing the 360-degree forms was easy, but the requirement for faculty presence during the consent process was burdensome.

CONCLUSION

Results from this pilot study suggest that self, faculty, and patient evaluations of resident performance constitutes a valid and reliable assessment of resident competence. Additional data are needed to determine whether the 360-degree assessment should be incorporated into residency programs and how frequently the assessment should be performed. Requiring only a specified number of assessments per rotation would make the process less burdensome for residents and faculty.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Wood J
Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, WI 53792, USA.
Collins J
No affiliation info available
Burnside ES
No affiliation info available
Albanese MA
No affiliation info available
Propeck PA
No affiliation info available
Kelcz F
No affiliation info available
Spilde JM
No affiliation info available
Schmaltz LM
No affiliation info available

MeSH

BreastClinical CompetenceCommunicationDiagnostic ImagingFaculty, MedicalFeasibility StudiesFeedbackFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMalePatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsPilot ProjectsRadiologyRadiology, InterventionalReproducibility of ResultsSelf-Evaluation Programs

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

15288041

Citation

Wood, Jonathan, et al. "Patient, Faculty, and Self-assessment of Radiology Resident Performance: a 360-degree Method of Measuring Professionalism and Interpersonal/communication Skills." Academic Radiology, vol. 11, no. 8, 2004, pp. 931-9.
Wood J, Collins J, Burnside ES, et al. Patient, faculty, and self-assessment of radiology resident performance: a 360-degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills. Acad Radiol. 2004;11(8):931-9.
Wood, J., Collins, J., Burnside, E. S., Albanese, M. A., Propeck, P. A., Kelcz, F., Spilde, J. M., & Schmaltz, L. M. (2004). Patient, faculty, and self-assessment of radiology resident performance: a 360-degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills. Academic Radiology, 11(8), 931-9.
Wood J, et al. Patient, Faculty, and Self-assessment of Radiology Resident Performance: a 360-degree Method of Measuring Professionalism and Interpersonal/communication Skills. Acad Radiol. 2004;11(8):931-9. PubMed PMID: 15288041.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Patient, faculty, and self-assessment of radiology resident performance: a 360-degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills. AU - Wood,Jonathan, AU - Collins,Jannette, AU - Burnside,Elizabeth S, AU - Albanese,Mark A, AU - Propeck,Pamela A, AU - Kelcz,Frederick, AU - Spilde,Jeannette M, AU - Schmaltz,Lisa M, PY - 2004/02/16/received PY - 2004/04/14/accepted PY - 2004/8/4/pubmed PY - 2004/10/9/medline PY - 2004/8/4/entrez SP - 931 EP - 9 JF - Academic radiology JO - Acad Radiol VL - 11 IS - 8 N2 - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To develop and test the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a 360-degree evaluation to measure radiology resident competence in professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An evaluation form with 10 Likert-type items related to professionalism and interpersonal/communication skills was completed by a resident, supervising radiologist and patient after resident-patient interactions related to breast biopsy procedures. Residents were also evaluated by faculty, using an end-of-rotation global rating form. Residents, faculty, and technologists were queried regarding their reaction to the assessments after a 7-month period. RESULTS: Fifty-six complete 360-degree data sets (range, 2-14 per resident) and seven rotational evaluations for seven residents were analyzed and compared. Internal consistency reliability estimates were 0.85, 0.86, and 0.87 for resident, patient, and faculty 360-degree evaluations, respectively. Correlations between resident-versus-patient, resident-versus-faculty, and patient-versus-faculty ratings for the 56 interactions were -0.06 (P =.64), 0.31 (P <.02), and 0.45 (P <.0006), respectively. Pearson correlation coefficients approached significant correlation (0.70) between the faculty global rating and patient 360-degree scores (P =.08) but not with faculty 360-degree scores. Residents and faculty felt that completing the 360-degree forms was easy, but the requirement for faculty presence during the consent process was burdensome. CONCLUSION: Results from this pilot study suggest that self, faculty, and patient evaluations of resident performance constitutes a valid and reliable assessment of resident competence. Additional data are needed to determine whether the 360-degree assessment should be incorporated into residency programs and how frequently the assessment should be performed. Requiring only a specified number of assessments per rotation would make the process less burdensome for residents and faculty. SN - 1076-6332 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/15288041/Patient_faculty_and_self_assessment_of_radiology_resident_performance:_a_360_degree_method_of_measuring_professionalism_and_interpersonal/communication_skills_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -