P M Ram | PubMed Health

PubMed2004

Setting a standard for performance assessment of doctor-patient communication in general practice.

CONTEXT: Continuing professional development (CPD) of general practitioners. OBJECTIVE: Criterion-referenced standards for assessing performance in the real practice of general practitioners (GPs) should be available to identify learning needs or poor performers for CPD. The applicability of common standard setting procedures in authentic assessment has not been investigated. METHODS: To set a standard for assessment of GP-patient communication with video observation of daily practice, we investigated 2 well known examples of 2 different standard setting approaches. An Angoff procedure was applied to 8 written cases. A borderline regression method was applied to videotaped consultations of 88 GPs. The procedures and outcomes were evaluated by the applicability of the procedure, the reliability of the standards and the credibility as perceived by the stakeholders, namely, the GPs. RESULTS: Both methods are applicable and reliable; the obtained standards are credible according to the GPs. CONCLUSIONS: Both modified methods can be used to set a standard for assessment in daily practice. The context in which the standard will be used - i.e. the specific purpose of the standard, the moment the standard must be available or if specific feedback must be given - is important because methods differ in practical aspects.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2000

Quality assessment in general practice trainers.

INTRODUCTION: General practice trainers hold a key position in general practice training, especially through their provision of a role model. Their own competence in general practice care is important in this regard. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a quality assessment programme could identify the strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers in four main domains of general practice care. METHODS: The quality assessment programme comprised validated tests on four domains of general practice: general medical knowledge, knowledge of medical-technical skills, consultation skills and practice management. The criterion for the identification of relative strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers was a variation in the scores of trainers indicating higher and lower scores (strengths and weaknesses) within each domain. RESULTS: GP trainers (n=105) were invited to participate in the study and 90% (n=94) did so. The variation in scores allowed the indication of strengths and weaknesses. Main strengths were: general medical knowledge of the digestive system; knowledge of medical skills relating to the skin; consultation skills concerning empathy; practice management with regard to accessibility. Main weaknesses were: general medical knowledge of the neurological system; knowledge of the medical/technical skills relating to the endocrine metabolic and nutritional system; consultation skills regarding shared decision making; practice management involving cooperation with staff and other care providers. DISCUSSION: This first systematic evaluation of GP trainers identified their strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses identified will be used in the improvement process as topics for collective improvement in the GP trainers' general curriculum and in individual learning plans.

Educational Measurement↗