Search

Abstract Background Face-to-face feedback plays an important role in health professionals’ workplace learning. The literature describes guiding principles regarding effective feedback but it is not clear how to enact these. We aimed to create a Feedback Quality Instrument (FQI), underpinned by a social constructivist perspective, to assist educators in collaborating with learners to support learner-centred feedback interactions. In earlier research, we developed a set of observable educator behaviours designed to promote beneficial learner outcomes, supported by published research and expert consensus. This research focused on analysing and refining this provisional instrument, to create the FQI ready-to-use. Methods We collected videos of authentic face-to-face feedback discussions, involving educators (senior clinicians) and learners (clinicians or students), during routine clinical practice across a major metropolitan hospital network. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of the video data were used to refine the provisional instrument. Raters administered the provisional instrument to systematically analyse educators’ feedback practice seen in the videos. This enabled usability testing and resulted in ratings data for psychometric analysis involving multifaceted Rasch model analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Parallel qualitative research of the video transcripts focused on two under-researched areas, psychological safety and evaluative judgement, to provide practical insights for item refinement. The provisional instrument was revised, using an iterative process, incorporating findings from usability testing, psychometric testing and parallel qualitative research and foundational research. Results Thirty-six videos involved diverse health professionals across medicine, nursing and physiotherapy. Administering the provisional instrument generated 174 data sets. Following refinements, the FQI contained 25 items, clustered into five domains characterising core concepts underpinning quality feedback: set the scene, analyse performance, plan improvements, foster learner agency, and foster psychological safety. Conclusions The FQI describes practical, empirically-informed ways for educators to foster quality, learner-centred feedback discussions. The explicit descriptions offer guidance for educators and provide a foundation for the systematic analysis of the influence of specific educator behaviours on learner outcomes.

Abstract Background Many people with advanced dementia live in residential aged care homes. Care home staff need the knowledge and skills to provide high-quality end-of-life (EOL) dementia care. However, several studies have found EOL dementia care to be suboptimal, and care staff have reported they would benefit from training in palliative care and dementia. Simulation offers an immersive learning environment and has been shown to improve learners’ knowledge and skills. However, there is little research on simulation training for residential care staff. This article presents the development and evaluation protocol of IMproving Palliative care Education and Training Using Simulation in Dementia (IMPETUS-D) - a screen-based simulation training program on palliative dementia care, targeted at residential care staff. IMPETUS-D aims to improve the quality of palliative care provided to people living with dementia in residential care homes, including avoiding unnecessary transfers to hospital. Methods A cluster RCT will assess the effect of IMPETUS-D. Twenty-four care homes (clusters) in three Australian cities will be randomised to receive either the IMPETUS-D intervention or usual training opportunities (control). The primary outcome is to reduce transfers to hospital and deaths in hospital by 20% over 6-months in the intervention compared to the control group. Secondary outcomes include uptake of goals of care plans over 6 and 12 months, change in staff knowledge and attitudes towards palliative dementia care over 6 months, change in transfers to hospital and deaths in hospital over 12 months. For the primary analysis logistic regression models will be used with standard errors weighted by the cluster effects. A mixed methods process evaluation will be conducted alongside the cluster RCT to assess the mechanisms of impact, the implementation processes and contextual factors that may influence the delivery and effects of the intervention. Discussion In Australia, the need for high-quality advanced dementia care delivered in residential aged care is growing. This study will assess the effect of IMPETUS-D a new simulation-based training program on dementia palliative and EOL care. This large multisite trial will provide robust evidence about the impact of the intervention. If successful, it will be distributed to the broader residential care sector. Trial registration ANZCTR, ACTRN12618002012257. Registered 14 December 2018.

Abstract Background Verbal feedback plays a critical role in health professions education but it is not clear which components of effective feedback have been successfully translated from the literature into supervisory practice in the workplace, and which have not. The purpose of this study was to observe and systematically analyse educators’ behaviours during authentic feedback episodes in contemporary clinical practice. Methods Educators and learners videoed themselves during formal feedback sessions in routine hospital training. Researchers compared educators’ practice to a published set of 25 educator behaviours recommended for quality feedback. Individual educator behaviours were rated 0 = not seen, 1 = done somewhat, 2 = consistently done. To characterise individual educator’s practice, their behaviour scores were summed. To describe how commonly each behaviour was observed across all the videos, mean scores were calculated. Results Researchers analysed 36 videos involving 34 educators (26 medical, 4 nursing, 4 physiotherapy professionals) and 35 learners across different health professions, specialties, levels of experience and gender. There was considerable variation in both educators’ feedback practices, indicated by total scores for individual educators ranging from 5.7 to 34.2 (maximum possible 48), and how frequently specific feedback behaviours were seen across all the videos, indicated by mean scores for each behaviour ranging from 0.1 to 1.75 (maximum possible 2). Educators commonly provided performance analysis, described how the task should be performed, and were respectful and supportive. However a number of recommended feedback behaviours were rarely seen, such as clarifying the session purpose and expectations, promoting learner involvement, creating an action plan or arranging a subsequent review. Conclusions These findings clarify contemporary feedback practice and inform the design of educational initiatives to help health professional educators and learners to better realise the potential of feedback.