Evaluation of inter-professional communication and leadership skills among graduating Canadian urology residents
Introduction: The importance of developing inter-professional communication and leadership skills among residents is well-recognized; however, formal tools to assess these skills are lacking. The goal of our study was to assess the leader and communicator roles in graduating urology residents using a validated selfassessment form developed for business students that focuses on inter-professional skills.
Methods: Chief residents (n=36) were evaluated with surveys of communication and leadership skills. The same surveys were administered through email to the residents’ program directors (PDs). Resident self-assessment and PD assessment were compared using paired and non-paired t-tests.
Results: Graduating urology residents’ self-assessment of their communication and leadership skills did not differ from assessments made by their PDs (77.6 vs. 74.4%; p=0.19); however, there were outlier candidates in whom PD assessment differed substantially from self-assessment on both surveys. Graduating urology residents scored themselves higher on self-awareness (82.6 vs. 77%; p=0.05) and lower on stress management (67.7 vs. 77%; p=0.01) compared to their PDs. Resident self-assessment scores were similar to business students on both communication and leadership surveys. Limitations were the small sample size and lack of survey evaluation by those surveyed.
Conclusions: Graduating urology residents’ self-assessment of their own communication and leadership skills did not differ greatly from assessment by their PDs or a sample of business students. Comparison of self-assessment evaluations and evaluations by PDs allowed us to identify outliers in whom self-assessment and PD assessment markedly differed, which may allow for more focused and meaningful feedback.
Frank J, Snell L, Sherbino J. CanMEDS 2015 - Leader. CanMEDS Physician Competency Framework 2015. http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/common/documents/canmeds/framework/canmeds2015_framework_series_IV_e.pdf
Yaszay B, Kubiak E, Agel J, et al. ACGME core competencies: where are we? Orthopedics 2009;32:171. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19309062
Roberts G, Beiko D, Touma N, et al. Are we getting through? A national survey on the CanMEDS communicator role in urology residency. Can Urol Assoc J 2013;7:437–41. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24381664
Chou S, Cole G, McLaughlin K, et al. CanMEDS evaluation in Canadian postgraduate training programmes: tools used and programme director satisfaction. Med Educ 2008;42:879–86. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18715485
Whetten D, Cameron K. Introduction and Chapter 4: Building relationships by communicating supportively, Developing Management Skills, 8th edition. Pearson Education, 2015. https://fac.ksu.edu.sa/sites/default/files/developing_management_skills-8th_edition.pdf
Atkins PWB, Wood RE. Self-versus others’ ratings as predictors of assessment center ratings:Validation evidence for 360-degree feedback programs. Pers Psychol 2002;55:871–904. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00133.x
Donnon T, Al Ansari A, Al Alawi S, et al. The Reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment. Acad Med 2014;89:511–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24448051
Moonen–van Loon JMW, Overeem K, Govaerts MJB, et al. The reliability of multisource feedback in competency-based assessment programs. Acad Med 2015;90:1093–9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25993283
Violato C, Lockyer J, Fidler H. Multisource feedback: a method of assessing surgical practice. BMJ 2003;326:546–8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12623920
Dwyer T, Takahashi SG, Hynes MK, et al. How to assess communication, professionalism, collaboration and the other intrinsic CanMEDS roles in orthopedic residents: Use of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Can J Surg. 2014;57:230–6.
Jefferies A, Simmons B, Ng E, et al. Assessment of multiple physician competencies in postgraduate training: utility of the structured oral examination. Adv Heal Sci Educ 2011;16:569–77. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21279437
Revilla M, Ochoa C. Ideal and maximum length for a web survey. Int J Mark Stud 2017;59:557-565. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2501/IJMR-2017-039?journalCode=mrea
Rolstad S, Adler J, Rydén A. Response burden and questionnaire length: Is shorter better? A review and meta-analysis. Value Heal 2011;14:1101–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.003
Calhoun AW, Rider EA, Peterson E, et al. Multi-rater feedback with gap analysis: An innovative means to assess communication skill and self-insight. Patient Educ Couns 2010;80:321–6.
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.