Abstract
Objective
The aim of this pilot project was to explore the extent to which judgments made by psychiatrist examiners accord with those of patients in postgraduate clinical examinations, so as to inform further consideration of the role of patients in such assessments.
Method
Senior psychiatrist examiners (N=8) and patients (N=30) rated 16 aspects of trainee psychiatrist interviewing style and performance during 30 observed clinical interviews (OCIs) conducted in the format of official examinations.
Results
Significant differences were apparent in the judgments of examiners and patients regarding 7 of 16 rated aspects of trainee performance. Differences were evident largely in domains in which patients could be expected to be “expert,” reflecting their subjective experience of the interviewer. By contrast, there was little difference in the judgments of patients and examiners on the more technical criteria.
Conclusion
These preliminary findings provide some challenge to the assumption that psychiatrists are the best judges of the “technical” skills and knowledge required by the profession. They support previous findings, with simulated patients, of the discrepancy between patient and examiner judgments of the more subjective elements of the examination. Psychiatric patients could contribute to clinical examinations as co-examiners, rather than merely constituting the substrate for the examination.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Australian Medical Council: RANZCP Accreditation Report. Melbourne. 2009
Wass V, van der Vleuten C: The long case. Med Educ 2004; 38:1176–1180
Moeke-Maxwell T, Wells D, Mellsop GW. Tangata Whaiora/ Consumers’ Perspectives on Current Psychiatric Classification Systems. International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2008;2
Parkes J, Sinclair N, McCarty T: Appropriate expertise and training for standardized patient assessment examiners. Acad Psychiatry 2009; 33:285–288
McLay RN, Rodenhauser P, Anderson DS, et al: Simulating a full-length psychiatric interview with a complex patient: an OSCE for medical students. Acad Psychiatry 2002; 26:162–167
Whelan P, Church L, Kadry K: Using standardized patients’ marks in scoring postgraduate psychiatry OSCEs. Acad Psychiatry 2009; 33:319–322
Sloan D, Lannion L, Swanwick G, et al: Participating in the MRCPsych examinations: the patients’ perspective. Psychiatr Bull 1997; 21:646–648
PAR: Program description. www.par-program.org
Wykurz G, Kelly D. Developing the role of patients as teachers: literature review. BMJ 2002;325:818–821
Dogra N, Anderson J, Edwards R, et al: Service user perspectives about their roles in undergraduate medical training about mental health. Med Teach 2008; 30:e152–e156
Barnes D, Carpenter J, Bailey D: Partnerships with service users in interprofessional education for community mental health: a case study. Journal of Interprofessional Health Care 2000; 14:189–200
Mazor KM, Ockene JK, Rogers HJ, Carlin MM, Quirk ME. The Relationship between Checklist Scores on a Communication OSCE and Analogue Patients’ Perceptions of Communication. Advances in Health Science Education 2005; 10:37–51
Finlay IG, Stott NC, Kinnersley P: The assessment of communication skills in palliative medicine: a comparison of the scores of examiners and simulated patients. Med Educ 1995; 29:424–429
Thomson AN: Consumer assessment of interview skills in a family practice certification examination. Fam Med 1993; 25:41–44
Clauser BE: Further discussion of SP checklists and videotaped performances. Acad Med 2000; 75:315–316, author reply 317–318
Egener B, Cole-Kelly K: Satisfying the patient, but failing the test. Acad Med 2004; 79:508–510
Durning SJ, Artino A, Boulet J, et al: Making use of contrasting participant views of the same encounter. Med Educ 2010; 44:953–961
Foucault M: Discipline and Punish, 2nd Edition. New York, Vintage Books, 1975, p 170
Sarangi S, Roberts C: The dynamics of interactional and institutional orders in work-related settings, in Talk, Work, and Institutional Order Discourse in Medical, Mediation, and Management Settings. Edited by Sarangi S, Roberts C. Berlin, Germany, Mouton de Gruyter, 1999
Hodges BD, McNaughton N: Who should be an OSCE examiner? Acad Psychiatry 2009; 33:282–284
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mellsop, G.W., MacDonald, J., Badri, S.E. et al. Patients’ Appraisal of Psychiatric Trainee Interview Skills. Acad Psychiatry 36, 374–379 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.10110164
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.10110164