Assessing anaesthesiology and intensive care specialty physicians: An Italian language multisource feedback system

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 23;16(4):e0250404. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250404. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

Background: Physician professionalism, including anaesthesiologists and intensive care doctors, should be continuously assessed during training and subsequent clinical practice. Multi-source feedback (MSF) is an assessment system in which healthcare professionals are assessed on several constructs (e.g., communication, professionalism, etc.) by multiple people (medical colleagues, coworkers, patients, self) in their sphere of influence. MSF has gained widespread acceptance for both formative and summative assessment of professionalism for reflecting on how to improve clinical practice.

Methods: Instrument development and psychometric analysis (feasibility, reliability, construct validity via exploratory factor analysis) for MSF questionnaires in a postgraduate specialty training in Anaesthesiology and intensive care in Italy. Sixty-four residents at the Università del Piemonte Orientale (Italy) Anesthesiology Residency Program. Main outcomes assessed were: development and psychometric testing of 4 questionnaires: self, medical colleague, coworker and patient assessment.

Results: Overall 605 medical colleague questionnaires (mean of 9.3 ±1.9) and 543 coworker surveys (mean 8.4 ±1.4) were collected providing high mean ratings for all items (> 4.0 /5.0). The self-assessment item mean score ranged from 3.1 to 4.3. Patient questionnaires (n = 308) were returned from 31 residents (40%; mean 9.9 ± 6.2). Three items had high percentages of "unable to assess" (> 15%) in coworker questionnaires. Factor analyses resulted in a two-factor solution: clinical management with leadership and accountability accounting for at least 75% of the total variance for the medical colleague and coworker's survey with high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α > 0.9). Patient's questionnaires had a low return rate, a limited exploratory analysis was performed.

Conclusions: We provide a feasible and reliable Italian language MSF instrument with evidence of construct validity for the self, coworkers and medical colleague. Patient feedback was difficult to collect in our setting.

MeSH terms

  • Anesthesiologists*
  • Clinical Competence*
  • Critical Care*
  • Health Personnel*
  • Humans
  • Italy
  • Professionalism*
  • Self-Assessment*
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Grants and funding

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.