ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2011
Prospective controlled assessment of impact of feedback on gastroenterology trainees in outpatient practice.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPrevious studies have demonstrated the value of systematic feedback in enhancing endoscopic procedure performance. It remains unknown whether feedback may play a role in modifying physician performance in outpatient practice. This study aimed to assess the impact of systematic feedback on duration of office visits of gastroenterology (GI) trainees in outpatient practice.
methodsPatients attending a GI outpatient department in an academic medical center were prospectively followed over 4 months. The duration of office visits for consecutive patients seen by five GI fellows of similar experience level were recorded for 2 months (pre-feedback); confidential feedback was then provided to each fellow on a weekly basis for 2 months detailing their individual consultation times and the comparative, anonymous times of the other fellows (post-feedback).
resultsOver the course of the study, 1,647 outpatients were seen by five GI fellows. Pre-feedback consultation durations differed significantly with one fellow taking 2.5 times longer than their colleague. Following feedback, times shortened significantly for all fellows, with the greatest impact observed in those trainees taking longer at baseline. There were no significant differences in satisfaction levels among patients seen by each trainee.
conclusionsThere was a wide disparity in the consultation times among GI fellows. Systematic feedback shortened times among all trainees and enhanced uniformity by having the greatest impact among those fellows taking longer at baseline. Routine provision of feedback may be valuable in enhancing uniformity of outpatient practice although clinicians should ensure that shortening consultation visits does not compromise quality of patient care. Future larger studies of feedback in this setting will be enhanced by incorporating objective measures of quality of care and patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21445580What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.