:: Volume 7, Issue 1 (3-2019) ::
mededj 2019, 7(1): 30-37 Back to browse issues page
Assessment of ENT Residents function using 360-degree evaluation method at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
M Shisheh-Gar , S Rivaz * , M Amini , M Rivaz
Education Development Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Abstract:   (4638 Views)
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Professional behaviors and communication skills residents in the traditional by faculty members evaluated, while one of the best ways to assess attitudes and behaviors is to ask people who are continually working in the workplace with residents have connection, 360- degree assessment in order to evaluate the performance of the clinical residents, a wide range of skills using multiple monitors Includes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate communication skills and interpersonal support of the ENT students of the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences using the 360-degree method.
METHODS: This is a descriptive-analytic study that all ENT residents (15 people) were educated in educational in Shiraz in 2017. Questionnaires have used the performance of the residents ( including questionnaires of faculty members of the "peer" medical colleagues, nurses' cohorts, self-assessment, and patient) were prepared and adjusted. The validity of the questionnaire confirmed by experts of medical education and the reliability of the questionnaire was obtained after a preliminary study (r=0.92). the findings were then analyzed using SPSS16 software using descriptive statistics and T-test and Pearson correlation coefficient was analyzed in p≤0.05.
FINDINGS: The results showed that the mean score of the evaluation scores by the assistants themselves (48.33±9.99), counterparts (52.01±5.13) and professors (66.12±5.22) the highest and the average of the patient (13.2±23.32) & nurses (31.2±6.86) was the lowest.
CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the evaluation should not be limited to a group of contacts, but for a more comprehensive assessment, it is necessary to involve different groups in the evaluation process.
Full-Text [PDF 581 kb]   (1107 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/03/16 | Accepted: 2019/03/16 | Published: 2019/03/16
References
1. Aronson L, Niihau’s B, Hill-Sakurai L, Lai C & O'Sullivan PS. A comparison of two methods of Teaching reflective ability in Year 3 medical students. Medical Education 2012; 46(8):807-14
2. Chandler N, Henderson G, Park B, Byerley J, Brown WD, Steiner MJ. Use of a 360-degree evaluation in the outpatient setting: the usefulness of nurse, faculty, patient/family, and resident self- evaluation. J Grad Med Educ. 2010;2(3):430–434
3. Rowlandson; Peter (2003) The Development of a Methodology for Scoring University Instructors ‘Performance: a case study involving two Thai universities Journal of Quality in Higher Education. 2003; 19(1): 55-68
4. Baharvand P, Nazer M. The assessment of 360- degree instrument's validity and reliability for evaluation of medical students' performance. J Med Edu Dev. 2013;5(9):1-6
5. Overeem K, Wollersheim H, Driessen E, Lombarts K, Van De Ven G, Grol R, et al. Doctors’ perceptions of why 360-degree feedback does (not) work: A qualitative study. Med Educ 2009; 43 (9): 874-82
6. Griffiths CE. Competency assessment of dermatology trainees in the UK. Clin Exp Dermatol 2004; 29 (5): 571-5
7. Joshi R, Ling FW, Jaeger J. Assessment of a 360-degree instrument to evaluate residents’ competency in interpersonal and communication skills. Acad Med 2004; 79 (5): 458-63
8. Overeem K, Faber MJ, Arah OA, Elwyn G, Lombarts KM, Wollersheim HC, et al. Doctor performance assessment in daily practice: Does it help doctors or not? A systematic review. Med Educ 2007; 41 (11): 1039-49
9. Antonioni, D. Park, H. The relationship between rate affect and three Sources of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of management, 2002; Vol 27 (4)
10. Karemi Moneghi H, Yavari M, Rajab Dizavandi F. Practical Guide to Clinical Teaching effectiveness. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University.2013;2
11. Berger JS, Pan E, Thomas J. A randomized, controlled crossover study to discern the value of 360-degree versus traditional, faculty-only evaluation for performance improvement of anesthesiology residents. [Online]. 2008. Available from: URL: http://www.asahq.org/jepm/archive Volumes/ManuscriptJEPMv3.pdf
12. Collins ML The thin book of 360-degree feedback: A Manager is Guide. Plano, TX; Thin Book Publishing Company; 2000
13. Malmvn Z. Iran University of Medical Sciences hospital administrators merit review based on feedback model 360. Master's thesis, University of Medical Sciences, School of Management. 2005
14. Menna JH., Petty M, Wheeler R.P, Vang O. Evaluation of Medical Student Professionalism: IAMSE 2005; 15(2):45-9
15. Nelson, EC. Gentry, MA. Mook, KH. et al. How many patients are needed to provide reliable evaluations of individual clinicians? Med Care. 2004; 42: 259-66
16. Joshi R, Ling FW, Jaeger J. Assessment of a 360-degree instrument to evaluate residents’ competency in interpersonal and communication skills. Acad Med 2004; 79 (5): 458-63
17. William, B. Brinkman, Sheela R. Geraghty, Bruce P. et al. Evaluation of Resident Communication Skills and Professionalism: A Matter of Perspective? PEDIATRICS 2006; 118(4): 1371-82
18. Davis, John D. Comparison of Faculty, Peer, Self, and Nurse Assessment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2002; 99 (4): 647–651
19. Ooungemi, D. Gonzalez, G. Fong. A et al. From the eye of the nurses: 360-degree evaluation of residents. J Contain Educe Health Prof 2009; 29 (2): 105-10. Goldstein R, Zucker man B. A perspective on 360-degree evaluation. J pediatr. 2010; 156:1-2
20. Goldstein R, Zucker man B. A perspective on 360-degree evaluation. J pediatr. 2010; 156:1-2
21. Paolo, A. Bonaminio, G. Measuring outcomes of undergraduate medical education: residency directors’ ratings of first year residents. Acad Med 2003; 78(1):90–5
22. Stark, R. korensein, D. Karani, R. Impact of a 360-degree professionalism assessment on faculty comfort and skills in feedback delivery. J Gen Intern Med 2008; 23(7): 969-72
23. Wood, J. Collins, J. Burnside, ES. et al: Patient, faculty, and self-assessment of radiology resident performance: a 360degree method of measuring professionalism and interpersonal/ Communication skills. Acad Radiol. 2004; 11(8): 931–9
24. Musick, DW. McDowell, SM. Clark, N. Pilot Study of a 360-DegreeAssessment Instrument for Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehab I 2003l; 82(5): 394-403
25. Ghoharian, V. Comparative Evaluation of teacher’s surgery by residents with teacher evaluation. Journal of Medic Educe, 2005; 3(3)
26. Javaheri Zadeh, N. Mehrabi, J. Bazoo Band, F. degree feedback evaluation results and performance compared to traditional methods and its relationship with employee satisfaction Lorestan University of Medical Sciences. Management development. 2011; 6, 57-67
27. Higgins, R. S., Adams, C., Dyson, A., Burke, J. 360- Degree Feedback Survey to Assess Faculty Competency in the Cardiothoracic Surgery Practice, Journal of surgical research 2007;137 (2), 302
28. Ghaitani, A. Investigating the competencies of faculty members of Islamic Azad University of Borujerd Branch using 360-degree feedback method. Thesis for Master of Science in Management.2010
29. Lelliott, P. Williams, R. Mears, A. et al. Questionnaires for 360-degree assessment of consultant psychiatrists: Development and psychometric properties. Be j psychiatry. 2008; 193(2):156-60

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 7, Issue 1 (3-2019) Back to browse issues page