Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Beş Adımda “Hasta-Hekim Görüşme Becerisi Değerlendirme Formu” Geçerlik Güvenirliği

Year 2023, , 20 - 27, 02.02.2023

Funda Tengiz , Aysel Baser , Hale Sezer , Hatice Şahin , Mustafa Agah Tekindal

https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.1098962

Abstract

Amaç: Tıp Fakültesi öğrencilerinin gelecekteki tıp uygulamalarını kolaylaştırmak için temel ve klinik iletişim ve klinik akıl yürütme becerilerini geliştirmek çok önemlidir. Bu becerilerin gelişiminin yolu hasta-hekim görüşmelerinden geçer. Bu araştırma, hasta-hekim görüşme becerilerinin değerlendirilmesinde performansa dayalı testlerde kullanılacak Hasta-Hekim Görüşme Becerisi Değerlendirme Formu'nun (P-PISEF) geçerlik ve güvenirliğinin belirlenmesi amacıyla yapılmıştır.
Yöntem: Betimsel ve metodolojik bir desene sahip olan bu çalışma, Haziran-Aralık 2021 tarihlerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veriler, geliştirilen form kullanılarak 18 öğretim üyesinin değerlendirmesi ile 197 öğrencinin performansından toplanmıştır. Açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri, Cronbach's alpha ve madde toplam puanları analiz edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Değerlendirme yapan öğretim üyelerinin %38,88 doçent öğretim üyesi idi. Değerlendirme formu (P-PISEF) 46 madde, beş ana bölüm ve yedi bileşenden oluşmaktadır. Öğretim üyeleri, %70'in üzerinde uyum ile öğrencilerin becerilerini belirli bir sırayla değerlendirmiştir. Değerlendiricilerin %90'ından fazlası P-PISEF'i benzer şekilde kullanarak değerlendirmiştir. Cronbach's Alpha (α) 0,793 olarak bulunmuştur. Bu çalışmadaki KMO değeri 0,733 olup, veriler analiz için orta düzeyde yeterlidir. Bartlett testinin sonucu 5983,586 (p<0,05) idi. Bu ölçüm, ölçmekte olduğumuz değişkenin örnek parametrede (uzmanlık, kariyer adımı vb.) çok değişkenli olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada açıklanan toplam varyans 57,577'dir.
Sonuç: P-PISEF tıp öğrencilerinin hasta-hekim görüşme simülasyonlarında kullanılabilecek bir değerlendirme aracıdır. Sonuçlar, müfredat planlayıcılarının tıbbi görüşme becerilerinin gelişimini daha etkin bir şekilde ele alan programlar düzenlemesine yardımcı olur.

Keywords

Hasta-hekim görüşme becerisi geçerlik güvenirlik beceri değerlendirme formu

References

  • Motola I, Devine LA, Chung HS, Sullivan JE, Issenberg SB. Simulation in healthcare education: A best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Med Teach. 2013;35(10):1511–30. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.818632.
  • Keifenheim KE, Teufel M, Ip J, et al. Teaching history taking to medical students: A systematic review. BMC Med Educ [Internet]. 2015;15(1). doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0443-x.
  • Keifenheim KE, Junne F, Erschens RS, et al. Peer-assisted history-taking groups: A subjective assessment of their impact upon medical students’ interview skills. GMS J Med Educ. 2017;34(3):1–15. doi:10.3205/zma001112.
  • Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for Direct Observation and Assessment of Clinical Skills of Medical Trainees A Systematic Review. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1316–26. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1365.
  • Sezer H, Şahin H, Uluer H. The coaching process evaluation scale used in nursing education. New Trends Issues Proc Humanit Soc Sci. 2017;4(2):68–74., 4(2), 51–57. doi:10.18844/prosoc.v4i2.2728.
  • Khan KZ, Gaunt K, Ramachandran S, Pushkar P. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part II: Organisation & Administration. Med Teach. 2013; 35(9):1447–63. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.818635.
  • Yükseköğretim Kurulu Genel Kurulu. Mezuniyet Öncesi̇ Tıp Eği̇ti̇mi̇ Ulusal Çeki̇rdek Programi [Internet]. Vol. 10.02.2021, Ulusal Çekirdek Eğitim Programı 2020. 2020. p. 127. Available from: https://www.yok.gov.tr/kurumsal/idari-birimler/egitim-ogretim-dairesi/ulusal-cekirdek-egitimi-programlari
  • (ACGME). Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [Internet]. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/program-directors-and-coordinators/welcome/accreditation/
  • Education WF for M. Guidelines for Accreditation of Basic Medical Education [Internet]. Available from: https://wfme.org/accreditation/
  • Bußenius L, Harendza S. Are different medical school admission tests associated with the outcomes of a simulation-based OSCE? BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1–8.
  • Kurtz S, Silverman J, Benson J, Draper J. Marrying content and process in clinical method teaching: Enhancing the Calgary-Cambridge guides. Acad Med. 2003;78(8):802–9. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200308000-00011.
  • Evans BJ, Sweet B, Coman GJ. Behavioural assessment of the effectiveness of a communication programme for medical students. Med Educ. 1993;27(4):344–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00279.x.
  • Kraan HF, Crijnen AAM, de Vries MW, Zuidweg J, Imbos T, van der Vleuten CP. To what extent are medical interviewing skills teachable? Med Teach. 1990;12(3–4):315–28. doi: 10.3109/01421599009006637.
  • Novack DH, Volk G, Drossman DA, Lipkin M. Medical Interviewing and Interpersonal Skills Teaching in US Medical Schools: Progress, Problems, and Promise. JAMA. 1993;269(16):2101–5.
  • Gärtner J, Prediger S, Harendza S. Development and pilot test of ComCare - a questionnaire for quick assessment of communicative and social competences in medical students after interviews with simulated patients. GMS J Med Educ. 2021;38(3):1–19. doi: 10.3205/zma001464.
  • Balcı A. Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma, Yöntem, Teknik ve İlkeler. (Üçüncü Ba. Ankara: Pegem A yayınevi: 2001.
  • Laidlaw A, Hart J. Communication skills: An essential component of medical curricula. Part I: Assessment of clinical communication: AMEE Guide No. 51. Med Teach. 2011;33(1):6–8.
  • Nestel D, Kidd J. Peer tutoring in patient-centred interviewing skills: Experience of a project for first-year students. Med Teach. 2003;25(4):398–403. doi: 10.1080/0142159031000136752.
  • Wells CS, Wollack JA. An Instructor’s Guide to Understanding Test Reliability. 2003.
  • Taber KS. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48(6):1273–96. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  • George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update. 2003.
  • Dziuban CD, Shirkey EC. When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychol Bull. 1974;81(6):358–361. doi:10.1037/h0036316.
  • Munro BH. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. (5. Baskı: USA: Lippincott Williams and Williams; 2005.
  • Watkins MW. Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Guide to Best Practice. J. Black Psychol. 2018,44(3):219–46. doi:101177/0095798418771807.
  • Williams B, Onsman A, Brown T. Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. J Emerg Prim Heal Care. 2010;8(3):1–13. doi:10.33151/ajp.8.3.93.
  • Prediger S, Harendza S. Perspective matters: assessment of medical students’ communication and interpersonal skills by simulated patients from the internal and external patient perspective. GMS J Med Educ. 2021;38(4):Doc82. doi: 10.3205/zma001478.
  • Shahrokh Esfahani M, Dougherty, ER. Effect of separate sampling on classification accuracy. Bioinformatics. 2014;30 (2): 242–250. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt662.

The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps

Year 2023, , 20 - 27, 02.02.2023

Funda Tengiz , Aysel Baser , Hale Sezer , Hatice Şahin , Mustafa Agah Tekindal

https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.1098962

Abstract

Objective: Developing basic and clinical communication and clinical reasoning skills is crucial in facilitating medical school students' future medical practice. The path to these skills` development goes through conducting patient-physician interviews. This research aims to conducted to determine the validity and reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form(P-PISEF) to be used in performance-based tests in the evaluation of patient-physician interview skills.
Methods: This study has a descriptive and methodological design and was carried out in June-December 2021. The data were collected from the performance of 197 students with the evaluation of 18 faculty members using the developed form. Explanatory and confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach's alpha and item the total score was analyzed.
Results: The distribution of the eighteen lecturers (38.88%) was associate professors. P-PISEF, comprising 46 articles, five main sections, and seven components. Lecturers were evaluated in a certain order with over 70% compliance. Over 90% of evaluators evaluated P-PISEF similarly. The Cronbach's Alpha (α) was found at 0.793. The KMO value in this study is 0.733, and the data is moderately adequate for analysis. The result of the Bartlett's test was 5983.586 (p<0.05). This measurement shows that the variable we are measuring is multivariate in the sample parameter (specialty, career step, etc.). The total variance explained in this study was 57.577.
Conclusion: P-PISEF is an evaluation tool that can be used in patient-physician interview simulations of medical students. The results help curriculum planners to arrange programs that address the development of medical interview skills more effectively.

Keywords

Patient-physician interview skill validity reliability skill evaluation form

References

  • Motola I, Devine LA, Chung HS, Sullivan JE, Issenberg SB. Simulation in healthcare education: A best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Med Teach. 2013;35(10):1511–30. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.818632.
  • Keifenheim KE, Teufel M, Ip J, et al. Teaching history taking to medical students: A systematic review. BMC Med Educ [Internet]. 2015;15(1). doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0443-x.
  • Keifenheim KE, Junne F, Erschens RS, et al. Peer-assisted history-taking groups: A subjective assessment of their impact upon medical students’ interview skills. GMS J Med Educ. 2017;34(3):1–15. doi:10.3205/zma001112.
  • Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for Direct Observation and Assessment of Clinical Skills of Medical Trainees A Systematic Review. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1316–26. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1365.
  • Sezer H, Şahin H, Uluer H. The coaching process evaluation scale used in nursing education. New Trends Issues Proc Humanit Soc Sci. 2017;4(2):68–74., 4(2), 51–57. doi:10.18844/prosoc.v4i2.2728.
  • Khan KZ, Gaunt K, Ramachandran S, Pushkar P. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part II: Organisation & Administration. Med Teach. 2013; 35(9):1447–63. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.818635.
  • Yükseköğretim Kurulu Genel Kurulu. Mezuniyet Öncesi̇ Tıp Eği̇ti̇mi̇ Ulusal Çeki̇rdek Programi [Internet]. Vol. 10.02.2021, Ulusal Çekirdek Eğitim Programı 2020. 2020. p. 127. Available from: https://www.yok.gov.tr/kurumsal/idari-birimler/egitim-ogretim-dairesi/ulusal-cekirdek-egitimi-programlari
  • (ACGME). Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [Internet]. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/program-directors-and-coordinators/welcome/accreditation/
  • Education WF for M. Guidelines for Accreditation of Basic Medical Education [Internet]. Available from: https://wfme.org/accreditation/
  • Bußenius L, Harendza S. Are different medical school admission tests associated with the outcomes of a simulation-based OSCE? BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1–8.
  • Kurtz S, Silverman J, Benson J, Draper J. Marrying content and process in clinical method teaching: Enhancing the Calgary-Cambridge guides. Acad Med. 2003;78(8):802–9. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200308000-00011.
  • Evans BJ, Sweet B, Coman GJ. Behavioural assessment of the effectiveness of a communication programme for medical students. Med Educ. 1993;27(4):344–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00279.x.
  • Kraan HF, Crijnen AAM, de Vries MW, Zuidweg J, Imbos T, van der Vleuten CP. To what extent are medical interviewing skills teachable? Med Teach. 1990;12(3–4):315–28. doi: 10.3109/01421599009006637.
  • Novack DH, Volk G, Drossman DA, Lipkin M. Medical Interviewing and Interpersonal Skills Teaching in US Medical Schools: Progress, Problems, and Promise. JAMA. 1993;269(16):2101–5.
  • Gärtner J, Prediger S, Harendza S. Development and pilot test of ComCare - a questionnaire for quick assessment of communicative and social competences in medical students after interviews with simulated patients. GMS J Med Educ. 2021;38(3):1–19. doi: 10.3205/zma001464.
  • Balcı A. Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma, Yöntem, Teknik ve İlkeler. (Üçüncü Ba. Ankara: Pegem A yayınevi: 2001.
  • Laidlaw A, Hart J. Communication skills: An essential component of medical curricula. Part I: Assessment of clinical communication: AMEE Guide No. 51. Med Teach. 2011;33(1):6–8.
  • Nestel D, Kidd J. Peer tutoring in patient-centred interviewing skills: Experience of a project for first-year students. Med Teach. 2003;25(4):398–403. doi: 10.1080/0142159031000136752.
  • Wells CS, Wollack JA. An Instructor’s Guide to Understanding Test Reliability. 2003.
  • Taber KS. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48(6):1273–96. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  • George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update. 2003.
  • Dziuban CD, Shirkey EC. When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychol Bull. 1974;81(6):358–361. doi:10.1037/h0036316.
  • Munro BH. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. (5. Baskı: USA: Lippincott Williams and Williams; 2005.
  • Watkins MW. Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Guide to Best Practice. J. Black Psychol. 2018,44(3):219–46. doi:101177/0095798418771807.
  • Williams B, Onsman A, Brown T. Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. J Emerg Prim Heal Care. 2010;8(3):1–13. doi:10.33151/ajp.8.3.93.
  • Prediger S, Harendza S. Perspective matters: assessment of medical students’ communication and interpersonal skills by simulated patients from the internal and external patient perspective. GMS J Med Educ. 2021;38(4):Doc82. doi: 10.3205/zma001478.
  • Shahrokh Esfahani M, Dougherty, ER. Effect of separate sampling on classification accuracy. Bioinformatics. 2014;30 (2): 242–250. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt662.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Clinical Sciences
Journal Section Original Article / Medical Sciences
Authors

Funda Tengiz 0000-0002-8491-9190

Aysel Baser 0000-0001-8067-0677

Hale Sezer 0000-0003-4199-7727

Hatice Şahin 0000-0002-5200-7533

Mustafa Agah Tekindal 0000-0002-4060-7048

Publication Date February 2, 2023
Submission Date April 5, 2022
Acceptance Date October 30, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2023

Cite

APA Tengiz, F., Baser, A., Sezer, H., Şahin, H., et al. (2023). The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.1098962
AMA Tengiz F, Baser A, Sezer H, Şahin H, Tekindal MA. The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps. KOU Sag Bil Derg. February 2023;9(1):20-27. doi:10.30934/kusbed.1098962
Chicago Tengiz, Funda, Aysel Baser, Hale Sezer, Hatice Şahin, and Mustafa Agah Tekindal. “The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 9, no. 1 (February 2023): 20-27. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.1098962.
EndNote Tengiz F, Baser A, Sezer H, Şahin H, Tekindal MA (February 1, 2023) The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 9 1 20–27.
IEEE F. Tengiz, A. Baser, H. Sezer, H. Şahin, and M. A. Tekindal, “The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps”, KOU Sag Bil Derg, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 20–27, 2023, doi: 10.30934/kusbed.1098962.
ISNAD Tengiz, Funda et al. “The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 9/1 (February 2023), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.1098962.
JAMA Tengiz F, Baser A, Sezer H, Şahin H, Tekindal MA. The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps. KOU Sag Bil Derg. 2023;9:20–27.
MLA Tengiz, Funda et al. “The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, vol. 9, no. 1, 2023, pp. 20-27, doi:10.30934/kusbed.1098962.
Vancouver Tengiz F, Baser A, Sezer H, Şahin H, Tekindal MA. The Validity and Reliability of the Patient-Physician Interview Skill Evaluation Form in Five Steps. KOU Sag Bil Derg. 2023;9(1):20-7.