gms | German Medical Science

Research in Medical Education – Chances and Challenges International Conference

20.05. - 22.05.2009, Heidelberg

Find the right language – using standardized students

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author presenting/speaker Christiane Eicher - University of Heidelberg, Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg, Germany
  • author Marco Roos - University of Heidelberg, Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg, Germany
  • author Joachim Szecsenyi - University of Heidelberg, Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg, Germany
  • author Peter Engeser - University of Heidelberg, Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg, Germany

Research in Medical Education - Chances and Challenges 2009. Heidelberg, 20.-22.05.2009. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2009. Doc09rmeB5

DOI: 10.3205/09rme10, URN: urn:nbn:de:0183-09rme108

Veröffentlicht: 5. Mai 2009

© 2009 Eicher et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Abstract

Background: Internship in general practice is based on a close relationship between GP-(general practitioner) teacher and student. In every day practice formative feedback is the most essential part in the teaching environment. To meet a need of GP-teachers to improve on their feedback skills, the department of General Practice and Health’s Services Research at the University of Heidelberg established a feedback training program with standardized students and patients.

Method: The changes in the participant’s feedback skills were measured by a pre-post questionnaire covering familiarity of feedback, self-confidence in realizing feedback, preparation for discussions with undergraduate students and improvement of communicative skills.

Results: On a 1 to 6 Likert-scale the participants showed a significant increase in the familiarity of formative feedback (mean 3,75 vs. 2,0, p<0.001), the preparation for discussions with undergraduate students (mean 3,43 vs. 1,62, p<0.001) and an improvement of communication skills (mean 2,50 vs. 1,88, p<0.028 ). The self-confidence in giving formative feedback showed an increase by trend (mean 3,86 vs. 2,93, p<0.75).

Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate the usefulness of feedback training programs with standardized students to improve the formative feedback skills of GP-teachers. It should be considered to implement such a feedback training program in faculty development to qualify our medical teachers and thereby hold and raise the standard in medical education.