data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2c3fd/2c3fd2c05ec175716150fd2054ac6d9c19b5c66f" alt="open-access-img"
Faculty Development Seminars Based on the One‐Minute Preceptor Improve Feedback in the Ambulatory Setting
Author(s) -
Salerno Stephen M.,
O'Malley Patrick G.,
Pangaro Louis N.,
Wheeler Gary A.,
Moores Lisa K.,
Jackson Jeffrey L.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
journal of general internal medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.746
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 1525-1497
pISSN - 0884-8734
DOI - 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.11233.x
Subject(s) - medicine , preceptor , ambulatory , faculty development , medical education , surgery , professional development
OBJECTIVE: While several models of medical student instruction in the ambulatory setting exist, few have been formally studied. We wished to assess the impact of a faculty development workshop based on the One‐Minute Preceptor model on the amount and quality of feedback in the outpatient setting. DESIGN: Ambulatory teaching behaviors were studied during consecutive outpatient precepting sessions before and after 3 faculty development workshops. Student–teacher interactions were assessed using audiotapes of teaching encounters coded through qualitative techniques, and surveys of teacher, learner, and patient satisfaction. SETTING: Ambulatory internal medicine clinic in a tertiary care medical center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Nine board‐certified internist faculty preceptors and 44 third‐year medical students. INTERVENTIONS: Three 90‐minute faculty development seminars based on the One‐Minute Preceptor teaching model. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Ninety‐four encounters with 18,577 utterances were recorded , half before and half after the seminars. After the workshops, the proportion of utterances that contained feedback increased from 17% to 22% ( P = .09) and was more likely to be specific (9% vs 15%; P = .02). After the workshops, teachers reported that the learning encounters were more successful ( P = .03) and that they were better at letting the students reach their own Conclusions ( P = .001), at evaluating the learners ( P = .03), and at creating plans for post‐encounter learning ( P = .02). The workshops had no effect on the duration of the student–teacher encounter or on student or patient satisfaction with the encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Brief, interactive, faculty development workshops based on the One‐Minute Preceptor model of clinical teaching resulted in modest improvements in the quality of feedback delivered in the ambulatory setting.