360 Degree Evaluation References

Butterfield PS, Mazzaferri EL A new rating form for use by nurses in assessing residents’ humanistic behavior. General Internal Medlczne. 1991; 6: 155-61. Examined the reliability and validity of nurses evaluation of residents. Found that five to six nurses evaluations needed to provide statistical reliability on this specific form. In addition, nurses provided a unique viewpoint from attending physicians.

Butterfield PS, Mazzaferri EL, Sachs LA. Nurses as evaluators of the humanistic behavior of internal medicine residents. Journal of Medical Education. 1987; 62:842-9. Description of pilot study of nurse evaluation of humanistic be­havior of internal medicine and cardiology residents.

Gray, JD. Global rating scales in residency education. Academic Medicine. 1996; 71(1 Jan Suppl): S55-S63. Review article pertaining to the data on the reliability of global rating scales performed by peers, faculty, self, patients, and pro­gram directors. Limited information regarding nurse evalua­tion of residents. Discusses the process of rater training, and implementation of rating scales.

Hall W, Violato C, Lewkonia R, Lockyer J, Fidler H, Toews J, Jennett P, DonoffM & Moores D. Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: the physician acievement review. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1999; 161(1)52-7. Results of the pilot program for 360 degree evaluations of prac­ticing physicians. Patients, peers, consulting and referring phy­sicians, and nonphysician coworkers were included as raters.

Klessig J, Robbins AS, Wieland D, Rubenstein L. Evaluating humanistic attributes of internal medicine residents. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 1989; 4:514-21. This study suggests that one rating group is not enough to properly measure the humanistic qualities of a resident physician.

Lipner, RS, Blank LL, Leas BF & Fortna GS. The value of patient and peer ratings in recertification. Academic Medicine. 2002; 77(10 Oct Supp): S64-S66. This study evaluates the use of 360 degree evaluation in 356 practicing physicians who volunteered to participate.

Mathews DA, Feinstein AR. A new instrument for patient's ratings of physician performance in the hospital setting. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 1989; 4:15-22. Description of a patient satisfaction survey specifically designed to evaluate hospital-based physicians.

Potter TB & Palmer RG 360-degree assessment in a multidisciplinary team setting. Rheumatology. 2003; 42: 1404-7. A study of360 evaluations for practicing rheumatologists. The entire multidisciplinary team, more similar to what exists on an inpatient psychiatry unit, were raters.

Ramsey PG, Carline JD, Blank LL, Wenrich MD. Feasibility of hospital-based use of peer ratings to evaluate the performances of practicing physicians. Academic Medicine. 1996; 71: 364-70. Results of multisite study of peer rating forms of practicing internists.

Ramsey P, Wenrich MD, Carline JS, Innui TS el al. Use of peer rating to evaluate physician performance. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1993; 269(13):1655-60. This is a feasibility study of peer ratings. The article has a nice description of an instrument to measure physician attributes, as well as information on implementation.

Sargaent 1M. Mann KV, Ferrier SN, Langille DB, Muirhead PD, Hayes VM & Sinclair DE. Responses of rural family physicians and their colleagues and coworker raters to a multi-source feedback process: a pilot study, Academic Medicine. 2003; 78(10) S42-S44. This study assessed factors that affect the scores that different groups give practicing physicians. They found that familiarity is positively correlated with scores, and that attention must be paid to finding raters who have worked with the physician enough to provide a reliable evaluation of their skills

Violato C, Marini A Toews J, Lockyer J & Fidler H. Feasibility and psychometric properties of using peers, consulting physicians, and co-workers and patients to assess physicians. Academic Medicine. 1997; 72(10 Oct Suppl): S82-S84. This study describes the development of different instruments for peers, coworkers, and patients to assess physician perfor­mance.

Weinrich, MD, Carline JD, Giles LM, Ramsey PG Ratings of the performance of practicing internists by hospital-based registered nurses. Academic Medicine 1993; 68(9):680-7. This study compared nursing and peer physician ratings for humanistic and clinical skills of 175 practicing internists. The nurses ratings differed from peer ratings and appeared to be a reliable and feasible way to measure communication and hu­manistic skills of physicians

Wolliscroft 10, Howell JD, Patel BP & Swanson DB. Resident­patient interactions: the humanistic qualities of internal medicine residents assessed by patients, attending physicians, program supervisors, and nurses. Academic Medicine. 1994; 69(3):216-224. This study of 360 degree feedback for internal medicine resi­dents suggests that a large number of attending and patient rat­ers are needed to achieve reproducibility, but smaller num­bers of program supervisors and nurses are necessary.


CHART STIMULATED RECALL

Cunnington J PW, Hanna E, Turnbull J, Kaigis TB, & Norman GR. Defensible assessment of the competency of the practicing physician. Academic Medicine. 1997; 72:9­12. This article describes the development of chart-stimulated recall as a part of competence measurement for licensing in Canada.

Goulet F, Jacques A, Gagnon R, Bourbeau D, et al. Perfor­mance assessment: Family practice physicians in Montreal meet the mark! Canadian Family Physician. 2002; 48: 1337-1344. This study utilized chart stimulated-recall interviews to assess the clinical performance of practicing family physi­cians in Montreal.

Hall W, Violato C, Lewkonia R, Lockyer J, Fidler H, Toews J, Jennett P, DonoffM & Moores D. Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: the physician achievement review. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1999; 161(1)52-7. This article discusses the use of chart-stimulated recall as one measure of clinical competence in Alberta.

Norman GR, Davis DA, Lamb S, Hanna E, Caulford P & Kaigis T. Competency assessment of primary care physi­cians as part of a peer review program. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1993; 270: 1046-51. This article compares reliability and correlations between scores on chart stimulated recall, orral examination, standardized patients, multiple choice exams and Observed Structured Clinical Exams.

Salvatori P, Baptise S, & Ward M. Developoment of a tool to measure clinical competence in occupational therapy: A pilot study? Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2000 67(1): 51-60. This article has a pragmatic description of implementing chart-stimulated recall in an occupational therapy program.