title: Useful but Different: Resident Physician Perceptions of Interprofessional Feedback.
abstract: Phenomenon: Based on recently formulated interprofessional core competencies, physicians are expected to incorporate feedback from other healthcare professionals. Based on social identity theory, physicians likely differentiate between feedback from members of their own profession and others. The current study examined residents' experiences with, and perceptions of, interprofessional feedback.
  
  
  METHODS
  In 2013, Anesthesia, Obstetrics-Gynecology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry residents completed a survey including questions about frequency of feedback from different professionals and its perceived value (5-point scale). The authors performed an analysis of variance to examine interactions between residency program and profession of feedback provider. They conducted follow-up interviews with a subset of residents to explore reasons for residents' survey ratings.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Fifty-two percent (131/254) of residents completed the survey, and 15 participated in interviews. Eighty percent of residents reported receiving written feedback from physicians, 26% from nurses, and less than 10% from other professions. There was a significant interaction between residency program and feedback provider profession, F(21, 847) = 3.82, p < .001, and a significant main effect of feedback provider profession, F(7, 847) = 73.7, p < .001. On post hoc analyses, residents from all programs valued feedback from attending physicians higher than feedback from others, and anesthesia residents rated feedback from other professionals significantly lower than other residents. Ten major themes arose from qualitative data analysis, which revealed an overall positive attitude toward interprofessional feedback and clarified reasons behind residents' perceptions and identified barriers. Insights: Residents in our study reported limited exposure to interprofessional feedback and valued such feedback less than intraprofessional feedback. However, our data suggest opportunities exist for effective utilization of interprofessional feedback.
authors.affiliation: a Department of Pediatrics , University of California San Francisco , San Francisco , California , USA.
authors.forename: Travis P
authors.initials: TP
authors.lastname: Vesel
authors.affiliation: b Department of Medicine , University of California San Francisco , San Francisco , California , USA.
authors.forename: Bridget C
authors.initials: BC
authors.lastname: O'Brien
authors.affiliation: a Department of Pediatrics , University of California San Francisco , San Francisco , California , USA.
authors.forename: Duncan M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Henry
authors.affiliation: a Department of Pediatrics , University of California San Francisco , San Francisco , California , USA.
authors.forename: Sandrijn M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: van Schaik
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000776:Anesthesiology / Q000193:education; D004503:Education, Medical, Graduate; D005246:Feedback; D005260:Female; D006176:Gynecology / Q000193:education; D006801:Humans; D007396:Internship and Residency; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D009774:Obstetrics / Q000193:education; D010372:Pediatrics / Q000193:education; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000193:education; D012495:San Francisco; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: 360 evaluation; interprofessional feedback; multisource feedback