Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Residents’ Engagement and Empathy Associated With Their Perception of Faculty’s Teaching Performance

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Faculty members rely on residents’ feedback about their teaching performance. The influence of residents’ characteristics on evaluations of faculty is relatively unexplored. We aimed to evaluate the levels of work engagement and empathy among residents and the association of both characteristics with their evaluation of the faculty’s teaching performance.

Methods

A multicenter questionnaire study among 271 surgery and gynecology residents was performed from September 2012 to February 2013. Residents’ ratings of the faculty’s teaching performance were collected using the system for evaluation of teaching quality (SETQ). Residents were also invited to fill out standardized measures of work engagement and empathy using the short Utrecht Work Engagement Scale and the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy, respectively. Linear regression analysis using generalized estimating equations to evaluate the association of residents’ engagement and empathy with residents’ evaluations of teaching performance.

Results

Overall, 204 (75.3 %) residents completed 1814 SETQ evaluations of 302 faculty, and 143 (52.8 %) and 140 (51.7 %) residents, respectively, completed the engagement and empathy measurements. The median scores of residents’ engagement and empathy were 4.56 (scale 0–6) and 5.55 (scale 1–7), respectively. Higher levels of residents’ engagement (regression coefficient b = 0.128; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.072–0.184; p < 0.001) and empathy (b = 0.113; 95 % CI 0.063–0.164; p < 0.001) were associated with higher faculty teaching performance scores.

Conclusions

Residents’ engagement and empathy appear to be positively associated with their evaluation of the faculty’s performance. A possible explanation is that residents who are more engaged and can understand and share others’ perspectives stimulate and experience faculty’s teaching better than others.

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. Beckman TJ, Ghosh AK, Cook DA et al (2004) How reliable are assessments of clinical teaching? a review of the published instruments. J Gen Intern Med 19:971–977

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Boerebach BC, Arah OA, Busch OR et al (2012) Reliable and valid tools for measuring surgeons’ teaching performance: residents’ vs. self evaluation. J Surg Educ 69:511–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lombarts KM, Bucx MJ, Arah OA (2009) Development of a system for the evaluation of the teaching qualities of anesthesiology faculty. Anesthesiology 111:709–716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Van der Leeuw R, Lombarts K, Heineman MJ et al (2011) Systematic evaluation of the teaching qualities of obstetrics and gynecology faculty: reliability and validity of the SETQ tools. PLoS One 6:e19142

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH et al (2010) The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) as a valid and reliable instrument for the evaluation of clinical teachers. Acad Med 85:1732–1738

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Van der Hem-Stokroos HH, van der Vleuten CP, Daelmans HE et al (2005) Reliability of the clinical teaching effectiveness instrument. Med Educ 39:904–910

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Oliveira Filho GR, Dal Mago AJ, Garcia JH et al (2008) An instrument designed for faculty supervision evaluation by anesthesia residents and its psychometric properties. Anesth Analg 107:1316–1322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lombarts MJ, Arah OA, Busch OR et al (2010) Using the SETQ system to evaluate and improve teaching qualities of clinical teachers. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 154:A1222

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Baker K (2010) Clinical teaching improves with resident evaluation and feedback. Anesthesiology 113:693–703

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maker VK, Lewis MJ, Donnelly MB (2006) Ongoing faculty evaluations: developmental gain or just more pain? Curr Surg 63:80–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Van der Leeuw RM, Slootweg IA, Heineman MJ et al (2013) Explaining how faculty act upon residents’ feedback to improve their teaching performance. Med Educ 47:1089–1098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Arah OA, Hoekstra JB, Bos AP et al (2011) New tools for systematic evaluation of teaching qualities of medical faculty: results of an ongoing multi-center survey. PLoS One 6:e25983

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Arah OA, Heineman MJ, Lombarts KM (2012) Factors influencing residents’ evaluations of clinical faculty member teaching qualities and role model status. Med Educ 46:381–389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Boerebach BC, Lombarts KM, Keijzer C et al (2012) The teacher, the physician and the person: how faculty’s teaching performance influences their role modelling. PLoS One 7:e32089

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Boerebach BC, Lombarts KM, Scherpbier AJ et al (2013) The teacher, the physician and the person: exploring causal connections between teaching performance and role model types using directed acyclic graphs. PLoS One 8:e69449

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Lombarts KM, Heineman MJ, Arah OA (2010) Good clinical teachers likely to be specialist role models: results from a multicenter cross-sectional survey. PLoS One 5:e15202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Van der Leeuw RM, Overeem K, Arah OA et al (2013) Frequency and determinants of residents’ narrative feedback on the teaching performance of faculty: narratives in numbers. Acad Med 88:1324–1331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Beckman TJ, Mandrekar JN (2005) The interpersonal, cognitive and efficiency domains of clinical teaching: construct validity of a multi-dimensional scale. Med Educ 39:1221–1229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Shanafelt TD et al (2010) Impact of resident well-being and empathy on assessments of faculty physicians. J Gen Intern Med 25:52–56

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Borel-Rinkes IH, Gouma DJ, Hamming JF (2008) Surgical training in The Netherlands. World J Surg 32:2172–2177. doi:10.1007/s00268-007-9460-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Brennan MF, Debas HT (2004) Surgical education in the United States: portents for change. Ann Surg 240:565–572

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Frank JR, Langer B (2003) Collaboration, communication, management, and advocacy: teaching surgeons new skills through the CanMEDS Project. World J Surg 27:972–978. doi:10.1007/s00268-003-7102-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Smith AJ, Aggarwal R, Warren OJ et al (2009) Surgical training and certification in the United kingdom. World J Surg 33:174–179. doi:10.1007/s00268-008-9814-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scheele F, Teunissen P, Van LS et al (2008) Introducing competency-based postgraduate medical education in The Netherlands. Med Teach 30:248–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim SS, Kaplowitz S, Johnston MV (2004) The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof 27:237–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mercer SW, Reynolds WJ (2002) Empathy and quality of care. Br J Gen Pract 52:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  27. Neumann M, Scheffer C, Tauschel D et al (2012) Physician empathy: definition, outcome-relevance and its measurement in patient care and medical education. GMS Z Med Ausbild 29:11

    Google Scholar 

  28. Prins JT, van der Heijden FM, Hoekstra-Weebers JE et al (2009) Burnout, engagement and resident physicians’ self-reported errors. Psychol Health Med 14:654–666

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Schaufeli W, Bakker AB (2003) Utrecht work engagement scale: preliminary manual. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schaufeli WB, Salanova M, González-Romá V et al (2002) The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Happiness Stud 3:71–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ et al (2002) Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiatry 159:1563–1569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hojat M (2007) Empathy in patient care antecedents, development, measurement, and outcomes. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sepällä P, Mauno S, Feldt T et al (2009) The construct validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: multisample and longitudinal evidence. J Happiness Stud 10:459–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Brislin RW (1970) Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross-Cultural Psychol 1:185–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Glaser KM, Markham FW, Adler HM et al (2007) Relationships between scores on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy, patient perceptions of physician empathy, and humanistic approaches to patient care: a validity study. Med Sci Monit 13:291–294

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ et al (2002) The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy: further psychometric data and differences by gender and specialty at item level. Acad Med 77:58–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hojat M, Mangione S, Kane GC et al (2005) Relationships between scores of the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). Med Teach 27:625–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Boor K, Van Der Vleuten C, Teunissen P et al (2011) Development and analysis of D-RECT, an instrument measuring residents’ learning climate. Med Teach 33:820–827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hanley JA, Negassa A, Edwardes MD et al (2003) Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: an orientation. Am J Epidemiol 157:364–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Prins JT, Hoekstra-Weebers JE, Gazendam-Donofrio SM et al (2010) Burnout and engagement among resident doctors in The Netherlands: a national study. Med Educ 44:236–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Christian MS, Garza AS, Slaughter JE (2011) Work engagement: a quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Pers Psychol 64:89–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Podsakoff NP, Whiting SW, Podsakoff PM et al (2009) Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol 94:122–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Mache S, Vitzthum K, Klapp BF et al (2013) Surgeons’ work engagement: influencing factors and relations to job and life satisfaction. Surgeon. doi:10.1016/j.surge.2013.11.015

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Di Lillo M, Cicchetti A, Lo SA et al (2009) The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometrics and group comparisons in Italian physicians. Acad Med 84:1198–1202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Neumann M, Edelhauser F, Tauschel D et al (2011) Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med 86:996–1009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Batt-Rawden SA, Chisolm MS, Anton B et al (2013) Teaching empathy to medical students: an updated, systematic review. Acad Med 88:1171–1177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Grow G (1991) Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Educ Q 41:125–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Newman P, Peile E (2002) Valuing learners’ experience and supporting further growth: educational models to help experienced adult learners in medicine. BMJ 325:200–202

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Van der Leeuw RM, Slootweg IA (2013) Twelve tips for making the best use of feedback. Med Teach 35:348–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Bakker AB, Demerouti E (2007) The job demands-resources model: state of the art. J Manag Psychol 22:309–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB (2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organiz Behav 25:293–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Tapia NM, Milewicz A, Whitney SE et al (2014) Identifying and eliminating deficiencies in the general surgery resident core competency curriculum. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4406

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Waran V, Narayanan V, Karuppiah R et al (2014) Injecting realism in surgical training: initial simulation experience with custom 3D models. J Surg Educ 71:193–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study is part of the research project “Quality of clinical teachers and residency training programs,” which is co-financed by the Dutch Ministry of Health; the Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam; and the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences of the University of Maastricht. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, decision to publish, or writing of the report. The authors thank all residents and faculty who participated in this study. We also thank https://Medox.nl for the web-based application of the system for evaluation teaching qualities (SETQ) and the Dutch Ministry of Health for co-financing the research project Quality of Clinical Teachers and Residency Training Programs. We thank our colleagues of the Professional Performance Research Group for their valuable suggestions and feedback. We are indebted to the Heusden Crew for their excellent social support during the writing of this paper.

Ethical approval

The institutional ethical review board of the Academic Medical Center of the University of Amsterdam waived ethical approval.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Professional Performance Research Group, Center for Evidence-Based Education, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, 1100, DD, The Netherlands

    S. S. Lenny Lases, Onyebuchi A. Arah & M. J. M. H. Kiki Lombarts

  2. Department of Surgery, Isala Klinieken, Zwolle, The Netherlands

    S. S. Lenny Lases & E. G. J. M. Robert Pierik

  3. Department of Epidemiology, The Fielding School of Public Health, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California, USA

    Onyebuchi A. Arah

  4. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Erik Heineman

Authors
  1. S. S. Lenny Lases
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Onyebuchi A. Arah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. G. J. M. Robert Pierik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Erik Heineman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. J. M. H. Kiki Lombarts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. S. Lenny Lases.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 5 and 6.

Table 5 Mean scores of residents’ engagement, empathy, and evaluations of overall teaching performance in academic versus nonacademic (teaching) hospitals
Full size table
Table 6 Mean scores of residents’ engagement, empathy, and evaluations of overall teaching performance among residents in their first 3 years versus last 3 years of their residency training
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lases, S.S.L., Arah, O.A., Pierik, E.G.J.M.R. et al. Residents’ Engagement and Empathy Associated With Their Perception of Faculty’s Teaching Performance. World J Surg 38, 2753–2760 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2687-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2687-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation