Influence of Expert Video Feedback, Peer Video Feedback, Standard Video Feedback and Oral Feedback on Undergraduate Medical Students’ Performance of Basic Surgical Skills
- 1 Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, The-odor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
- 2 Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, The-odor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
- 3 Centre of Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, Theodor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
- 4 Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, The-odor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
- 5 Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, The-odor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
- 6 Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, The-odor Stern Kai, Frankfurt, Germany
Abstract
Purpose: In daily clinical practice, sterile working conditions, as well as patient safety and self-protection, are essential. Thus, these skills should be taught appropriately during undergraduate training. Receiving constructive feedback can significantly improve future performance. Furthermore, reviewing one’s performance using video tools is a useful approach. This study investigates the impact of different modes of video feedback on the acquisition of practical surgical skills, including wound management and a bedside test. Methods: Third-year medical students completed a structured training of practical skills as part of their mandatory surgery rotation. All students received the same practical skills training for performing wound management and a bedside test. However, for feedback regarding their performance, students were assigned to one of four study groups: expert video feedback (receiving feedback by an expert after reviewing the recorded performance), peer video feedback (receiving feedback by a fellow student after reviewing the recorded performance), standard video (giving feedback to a standardized video of the skill), or oral feedback (receiving feedback by an expert without a video record). Afterwards, students completed two 5-minute OSCE stations in which they were assessed with respect to their acquired competencies. Effects on long-term retention were measured at two further measurement points. Results: A total of 199 students were included in the study (48 for expert video feedback, 49 for peer video feedback, 52 for standard video feedback, and 50 for oral feedback). All teaching methods were feasible in the given timeframe of 210 minutes for each module. There were nearly no statistically significant differences among the groups with regard to the technical and non-technical ratings for the three measurement points. Conclusion: In the present study, video-assisted feedback in various forms offered no significant benefit over oral feedback alone during simulation-based patient encounters.
- Beard, J. H., et al. (2012). Peer Assisted Learning in Surgical Skills Laboratory Training: A Pilot Study. Medical Teacher, 34, 957-959. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.706340
- Birnbach, D. J., et al. (2002). The Effectiveness of Video Technology as an Adjunct to Teach and Evaluate Epidural Anesthesia Performance Skills. Anesthesiology, 96, 5-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200201000-00007
- Brennan, T. A., et al. (2004). Incidence of Adverse Events and Negligence in Hospitalized Patients: Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. Quality & Safety Health Care, 13, 145-151. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2002.003822
- Burgess, A., & Mellis, C. (2015). Receiving Feedback from Peers: Medical Students’ Perceptions. Clinical Teacher, 12, 203-207. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12260
- Byrne, A. J., et al. (2002). Effect of Videotape Feedback on Anaesthetists’ Performance While Managing Simulated Anaesthetic Crises: A Multicentre Study. Anaesthesia, 57, 176-179. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2044.2002.02361.x
- Cantillon, P., & Sargeant, J. (2008). Giving Feedback in Clinical Settings. BMJ, 337, a1961. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1961
- English, R., et al. (2006). The Effectiveness and Reliability of Peer-Marking in First-Year Medical Students. Medical Education, 40, 965-972. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02565.x
- Fanning, R. M., & Gaba, D. M. (2007). The Role of Debriefing in Simulation-Based Learning. Simulation in Healthcare, 2, 115-125. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539
- Farquharson, A. L., et al. (2013). Randomized Trial of the Effect of Video Feedback on the Acquisition of Surgical Skills. British Journal of Surgery, 100, 1448-1453. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9237
- Frank J. R., et al., eds. (2015). CanMeds Physician Competency Framework. Ottawa: Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. http://www.royalcollege.ca/rcsite/documents/canmeds/canmeds-full-framework-e.pdf
- Gerberding, J. L. (2003). Clinical Practice. Occupational Exposure to HIV in Health Care Settings. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 826-833. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp020892
- Hodges, B. (2003). Validity and the OSCE. Medical Teacher, 25, 250-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590310001002836
- Issenberg, S. B., et al. (2005). Features and Uses of High-Fidelity Medical Simulations That Lead to Effective Learning: A BEME Systematic Review. Medical Teacher, 27, 10-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500046924