Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of video-assisted oral feedback versus oral feedback on surgical communicative competences in undergraduate training

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Feedback can significantly improve future performance. Reviewing one’s performance by video is discussed as useful adjunct to debriefing, particularly for non-technical skills. Communicative competencies are an essential part of daily clinical practice; thus should be taught and assessed during undergraduate training. The aim of this study was to compare the educational value of video-assisted feedback versus oral feedback in communicative competencies in the surgical context.

Methods

Fourth-year medical students completed a 210-min training unit of ‘taking patient’s history and obtaining informed consents prior to surgery’ using role plays. Oral feedback was received directly thereafter using agenda-led, outcome-based guidelines (ALOBA). In the study group, the role plays were video-taped and reviewed thereafter. Afterwards, students completed two OSCE stations, where they were assessed regarding their communicative competencies and the content of the clinical scenario.

Results

One-hundred students (49 receiving video-assisted feedback, 51 oral) participated in the study. Those receiving video-assisted feedback performed significantly better in overall score in both OSCE stations (p < 0.001), in all five assessed communicative competencies at taking patient history (p = 0.029 or better), and in 2 of 5 items at obtaining informed consent (p = 0.008, <0.001). The educational effect size for both tasks was large.

Conclusion

Using our methodology, video-assisted feedback offered a significant educational benefit over oral feedback alone during a simulated patient encounter in a surgical context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. CanMEDS. Physician competency framework. Ottawa: Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shah B, Miler R, Poles M, Zabar S, Gillespie C, Weinshel E, et al. Informed consent in the older adult: OSCEs for assessing fellows’ ACGME and geriatric gastroenterology competencies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106(9):1575–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kiehl C, Simmenroth-Nayda A, Goerlich Y, Entwistle A, Schiekirka S, Ghadimi BM, et al. Standardized and quality-assured video-recorded examination in undergraduate education: informed consent prior to surgery. J Surg Res. 2014;191(1):64–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. von Fragstein M, Silverman J, Cushing A, Quilligan S, Salisbury H, Wiskin C, et al. UK consensus statement on the content of communication curricula in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ. 2008;42(11):1100–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hargie O, Boohan M, McCoy M, Murphy P. Current trends in communication skills training in UK schools of medicine. Med Teach. 2010;32(5):385–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hartl A, Bachmann C, Blum K, Hofer S, Peters T, Preusche I, et al. Desire and reality–teaching and assessing communicative competencies in undergraduate medical education in German-speaking Europe—a survey. GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2015;32(5):Doc56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Thiels CA, Bergquist JR, Pandian TK, Heller SF. Improving communication skills and professionalism among general surgery residents, one page at a time. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(4):539–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Raper SE, Gupta M, Okusanya O, Morris JB. Improving communication skills: a course for Academic Medical Center Surgery Residents and Faculty. J Surg Educ. 2015;72(6):e202–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chipman JG, Beilman GJ, Schmitz CC, Seatter SC. Development and pilot testing of an OSCE for difficult conversations in surgical intensive care. J Surg Educ. 2007;64(2):79–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tchorz KM, Binder SB, White MT, Lawhorne LW, Bentley DM, Delaney EA, et al. Palliative and end-of-life care training during the surgical clerkship. J Surg Res. 2013;185(1):97–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Veloski J, Boex JR, Grasberger MJ, Evans A, Wolfson DB. Systematic review of the literature on assessment, feedback and physicians’ clinical performance: BEME guide no. 7. Med Teach. 2006;28(2):117–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Irby DM. Teaching and learning in ambulatory care settings: a thematic review of the literature. Acad Med. 1995;70(10):898–931.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cantillon P, Sargeant J. Giving feedback in clinical settings. BMJ. 2008;337:a1961.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mahmood T, Darzi A. The learning curve for a colonoscopy simulator in the absence of any feedback: no feedback, no learning. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(8):1224–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, Joo HS, Chow R, Hamstra SJ. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(2):279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):50–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, Fanning R, Nadkarni V, Savoldelli G. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(Suppl):S52–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Paul S, Dawson KP, Lanphear JH, Cheema MY. Video recording feedback: a feasible and effective approach to teaching history-taking and physical examination skills in undergraduate paediatric medicine. Med Educ. 1998;32(3):332–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Roter DL, Larson S, Shinitzky H, Chernoff R, Serwint JR, Adamo G, et al. Use of an innovative video feedback technique to enhance communication skills training. Med Educ. 2004;38(2):145–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Birnbach DJ, Santos AC, Bourlier RA, Meadows WE, Datta S, Stein DJ, et al. The effectiveness of video technology as an adjunct to teach and evaluate epidural anesthesia performance skills. Anesthesiology. 2002;96(1):5–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Scherer LA, Chang MC, Meredith JW, Battistella FD. Videotape review leads to rapid and sustained learning. Am J Surg. 2003;185(6):516–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sawyer T, Sierocka-Castaneda A, Chan D, Berg B, Lustik M, Thompson M. The effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing versus oral debriefing alone at improving neonatal resuscitation performance: a randomized trial. Simul Healthc. 2012;7(4):213–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ruesseler M, Weber R, Braunbeck A, Flaig W, Marzi I, Walcher F. Training of practical clinical skills in surgery—a training concept for medical students. Zentralbl Chir. 2010;135(3):249–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hodges B. Validity and the OSCE. Med Teach. 2003;25(3):250–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Regehr G, MacRae H, Reznick RK, Szalay D. Comparing the psychometric properties of checklists and global rating scales for assessing performance on an OSCE-format examination. Acad Med. 1998;73(9):993–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Harden RM, Gleeson FA. Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Med Educ. 1979;13(1):41–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dornan T, Boshuizen H, King N, Scherpbier A. Experience-based learning: a model linking the processes and outcomes of medical students’ workplace learning. Med Educ. 2007;41(1):84–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Teunissen PW, Scheele F, Scherpbier AJ, van der Vleuten CP, Boor K, van Luijk SJ, et al. How residents learn: qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities. Med Educ. 2007;41(8):763–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Schmidt M, Freund Y, Alves M, Monsel A, Labbe V, Darnal E, et al. Video-based feedback of oral clinical presentations reduces the anxiety of ICU medical students: a multicentre, prospective, randomized study. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:103.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Nilsen S, Baerheim A. Feedback on video recorded consultations in medical teaching: why students loathe and love it—a focus-group based qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5:28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Mairen Tomczak, Moni Thrun, Sebastian Pfau who helped during preparation and data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt/Main, Germany

    M. Ruesseler, B. Bender & S. Hoefer

  2. Centre of Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt/Main, Germany

    J. Sterz

  3. Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany

    F. Walcher

Authors
  1. M. Ruesseler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Sterz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Bender
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Hoefer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. Walcher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Ruesseler.

Ethics declarations

The study was conducted according to ethical principles of the Helsinki Declaration (Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects) and was approved by local ethics committee.

Funding

This study was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Grant 01PL12038A) as part of the joint research project, “Practical clinical competence—a joint program to improve training in surgery”.

Conflict of interest

Miriam Ruesseler, Jasmina Sterz, Bernd Bender, Sebastian Hoefer, and Felix Walcher declare that they have no further conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ruesseler, M., Sterz, J., Bender, B. et al. The effect of video-assisted oral feedback versus oral feedback on surgical communicative competences in undergraduate training. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 43, 461–466 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-016-0734-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-016-0734-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation