2019 HSC Section 2 - Practice Management

ARTICLE IN PRESS

study did not give the same number of feedback instan- ces, so individual scores of a surgeon may have carried more weight in the statistical analysis. In a larger study, it would be beneficial to compare SIMPL feedback scores to in-person feedback scores matched for the phy- sician giving the feedback. Further studies could focus on analyzing the rela- tionship between the quality of the feedback and the way in which surgeons speak, as measured by VRM and Role Dimensions Analysis. By getting a broader array of audio recordings from feedback given in mul- tiple different settings and through different mediums, we would be able to compare the way in which sur- geons speak directly to the quality of feedback that is being given. Future studies could also investigate the impact of surgeon and resident gender on the delivery and quality of feedback. CONCLUSION Our study was able to show a novel application of VRM and Role Dimension Analysis as it relates to feedback in graduate medical education. We were able to confirm the intuitive idea that the way a surgeon speaks when giving feedback via dictation is different than they speak when giving feedback in person. We found that although feedback delivery differed with the use of SIMPL, feedback quality did not. In the busy setting of surgical practice, the use of new, easily integrated tools to increase and improve the provision of resident feed- back is essential. Our findings suggest that using the dic- tation feature of the SIMPL smartphone application to deliver formative resident operative performance feed- back is a reasonable alternative to in-person delivery of feedback. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We acknowledge Ingie H Osman for her assistance with VRM training and Sasha Rosser for her contribution to the editing of our manuscript.

meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback interven- tion theory. Psychol Bull . 1996;119:254–284. 3. Johnson CE, Keating JL, Boud DJ, et al. Identifying edu- cator behaviours for high quality verbal feedback in health professions education: literature review and expert refinement. BMC Med Educ . 2016;16:96. 4. Veloski J, Boex JR, Grasberger MJ, Evans A, Wolfson DB. Systematic review of the literature on assess- ment, feedback and phsyians’ clinical performance: BEME Guide No. 7. Med Teach . 2009;28:117. 5. Sender Liberman A, Liberman M, Steinert Y, McLeod P, Meterissian S. Surgery residents and attending sur- geons have different perceptions of feedback. Med Teach . 2005;27:470–472. 6. Bohnen JD, George BC, Williams RG, Schuller MC, et al. The feasibility of real-time intraoperative per- formance assessment with SIMPL (system for improving and measuring procedural learning): early experience from a multi-institutional trial. J Surg Educ . 2016;73:118–130. 7. DaRosa D, Zwischenberger J, Meyerson S, George B, et al. A theory-based model for teaching and assess- ing residents in the operating room. J Surg Educ . 2013;70:24–30. 8. Hewson MG, Little ML. Giving feedback in medical education. J Gen Intern Med . 1998;13:111–116. 9. Bienstock JL, Katz NT, Cox SM, Hueppchen N, et al. To the point: medical education reviews- providing feedback. Am J Obstet Gynecol . 2007;196:508–513. 10. Chowdhury RR, Kalu G. Learning to give feedback in medical education. Obstet Gynaecol . 2004;6:243–247. 11. Searle JR. Speech Acts: An Essay in Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer- sity Press; 1969. 12. Cerny M. On the function of speech acts in doctor- patient communication. Linguistica ONLINE . 2007. 13. De Quieroz FA, Cardoso TB. The legitimacy of war under the perspective of the speech-act the- ory the cases of the first and second gulf wars (1991/2003) in a comparative analysis. J Politics Law. 2015;8:54–69. 14. Ahmed M, Arora S, Russ S, Darzi A, et al. Opera- tion debrief: a SHARP improvement in perfor- mance feedback in the operating room. Ann Surg . 2013;258:958–963.

REFERENCES

1. Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res . 2007;77:81–112. 2. Kluger AN, DeNisi A. The effects of feedback inter- ventions on performance: a historical review, a

Journal of Surgical Education Volume 00 /Number 00 & 2018

201