Original Article

Medical Students’ Perceptions of Feedback in a Busy Ambulatory Setting: A Descriptive Study Using a Clinical Encounter Card

Authors: Larrie W. Greenberg, MD

Abstract

Background: Residents and medical students have expressed repeated concerns over the years about the inadequate amounts and quality of feedback in the clinical setting. Despite innovative ways to teach the skill of giving feedback, the problem has not been fixed.


Methods: In this study, the author introduced the clinical encounter card to the ambulatory setting for faculty to use as a cue to provide feedback to students. At the end of the 4-week rotation, students anonymously reported on the amount, frequency, and quality of feedback they received.


Results: Students reported that the learning climate for giving/receiving feedback was very good to excellent. They rated the quality and amount of feedback they received from faculty as high on the Likert scale and the frequency just above the mean. Most of the feedback was directed toward knowledge and skills, and there were few reports of demeaning behavior. Feedback was timely, and students reported using the feedback to improve their performance. The clinical encounter card improved feedback to students in a busy ambulatory setting. Whereas the author did not monitor how often the clinical encounter card was used, there were ample cards on each student to provide mid-rotation feedback and summative evaluations. The students rated the process as the best of any clerkship rotation.


Conclusions: The clinical encounter card is an effective tool to enhance feedback in a busy pediatric ambulatory setting. It is not known if these results are generalizable, but readers are encouraged to repeat the study in other settings.


Key Points


* The clinical encounter card represents a user-friendly process for faculty to provide feedback to learners in the ambulatory setting.


* Students can be empowered to initiate the feedback process by having them give faculty this card.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Gill DH, Heins M, Jones PB. Perceptions of medical school faculty members and students on clinical clerkship feedback. J Med Educ 1984;259:856–864.
 
2. Irby DM. What clinical teachers in medicine need to know. Acad Med 1994;69:333–342.
 
3. Smith CS, Irby DM. The role of experience and reflection in ambulatory care education. Acad Med1997;72:32–35.
 
4. Ferenchick G, Simpson D, Blackman J, et al. Strategies for efficient and effective teaching in the ambulatory care setting. Acad Med 1997;72:277–280.
 
5. Ende J. Feedback in clinical medical education. JAMA 1983;250:777–781.
 
6. Skeff KM, Stratos GA, Bergen MR, et al. The Stanford faculty development program: a dissemination approach to faculty development for medical teachers. Teach Learn Med 1992;4:180–187.
 
7. Anderson VA, Carline JD, Ambruzy DM, Irby DM. Faculty development for ambulatory care educationAcad Med 1997;72:1072–1075.
 
8. Irby DM, Ramsey PG, Gillmore GM, Schaad D. Characteristics of effective clinical teachers of ambulatory care medicine Acad Med 1994;66:54–55.
 
9. Henson MG, Little MC. Giving feedback in medical education. J Gen Int Med 1998;13:111–116.
 
10. Bing-You RG, Greenberg LW, Wiedermann BL, Smith CS. A randomized multicenter trial to improve resident teaching with written feedback. Teach Learn Med 1997;9:10–13.
 
11. Bragg D, Treat R, Simpson DE. Have clinical teaching effectiveness ratings changed with the Medical College of Wisconsin’s entry into the health care marketplace? Acad Med2000;15(supplement):S59–S61.
 
12. Rhoton MF A new method to evaluate clinical performance and critical verdicts in anesthesia: quantification of daily comments by teachers. Med Educ 1989;23:280–289.
 
13. Casbergue J. Role of Faculty Development in Clinical Education, in Morgan MK, Irby DM (eds):Evaluating Clinical Competence in the Health Professions. St Louis, CV Mosby Co, 1978, pp 171–186.
 
14. Fernald DH, Staudenmaier AC, Tressler CJ, et al. Student perspectives on primary care preceptorships: enhancing the medical student preceptorship learning environment. Teach Learn Med2001;13:13–20.
 
15. Smith CS, Francovich C, Gieselman J, Servis M. A broader theoretical model for feedback in ambulatory care. Adv Health Sci Educ 1998;3:133–140.
 
16. Bing-You RG, Bertsch T, Thompson JA. Coaching medical students in receiving effective feedback.Teach Learn Med 1998;10:228–231.
 
17. Brennan BG, Norman GR. Use of encounter cards for evaluation of residents in obstetrics. Acad Med 1997;72:S43–S44.
 
18. Lye P, Bragg D, Simpson D. Improving feedback with a clinical encounter form. Acad Med1997;72:444–445.
 
19. Paukert JL, Richards ML, Olney C. An encounter card system for increasing feedback to students.Am J Surg 2002;183:300–304.
 
20. 2000 Medical Student Graduation Questionnaire. Association of American Medical Colleges, Division of Medical Education.
 
21. Pituch K, Harris M, Bogdewic S. The brief structured observation: a tool for focused feedback. Acad Med 1999;74:599.