• J Surg Educ · Nov 2018

    Comparative Study

    Examining the Impact of Using the SIMPL Application on Feedback in Surgical Education.

    • Kirsten Gunderson, Sarah Sullivan, Charles Warner-Hillard, Ryan Thompson, Jacob A Greenberg, Eugene F Foley, and Hee Soo Jung.
    • University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Madison, Wisconsin. Electronic address: kagunderson2@wisc.edu.
    • J Surg Educ. 2018 Nov 1; 75 (6): e246-e254.

    ObjectiveThe System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning (SIMPL) smartphone application allows physicians to provide dictated feedback to surgical residents. The impact of this novel feedback medium on the quality of feedback is unknown. Our objective was to compare the delivery and quality of best-case operative performance feedback given via SIMPL to feedback given in-person.DesignWe collected operative performance feedback given both in-person and via SIMPL from surgeons to residents over 6 weeks. Feedback transcripts were coded using Verbal Response Modes speech acts taxonomy to compare the delivery of feedback. We evaluated quality of feedback using a validated resident survey and third-party assessment form.SettingUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, a large academic medical institution.ParticipantsFour surgical attendings and 9 general surgery residents.ResultsNineteen SIMPL and 18 in-person feedback encounters were evaluated. Feedback via SIMPL was more directive (containing thoughts, perceptions, evaluations of resident behavior, or advice) and contained more presumptuous utterances (in which the physician reflected on and assessed resident performance or offered suggestions for improvement) than in-person feedback (p = 0.01). The resident survey showed no significant difference between the quality of feedback given via SIMPL and in-person (p = 0.07). The mean score was 47.74 (SD = 3.00) for SIMPL feedback and 45.33 (SD = 4.77) for in-person feedback, with a total possible score of 50. Third-party assessment showed no significant difference between the quality of feedback given via SIMPL and in-person (p = 0.486). The mean score was 23.40 (SD = 3.75) for SIMPL feedback and 22.25 (SD = 5.94) for in-person feedback, with a total possible score of 30.ConclusionsAlthough feedback given via SIMPL was more direct and based on the attendings' perspectives, the quality of the feedback did not differ significantly. Use of the dictation feature of SIMPL to deliver resident operative performance feedback is a reasonable alternative to in-person feedback.Copyright © 2018 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.