Using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) to Assess Communication Skills ofFamily Medicine Residents<br />Linda Myerho...
CAT<br />14-item patient satisfaction survey<br />Physician interpersonal and communication skills<br />Development based ...
Individualized Resident Sample Report<br />
Objectives<br />Gather benchmarking data for the use of the CAT in Family Medicine residency programs <br />Examine differ...
Sample & Methods<br />Six Family Medicine residency programs <br />Midwest & East coast<br />Urban, suburban, rural commun...
Scoring:<br />Mean ratings<br />Overall <br />By item<br />Percentage of “Excellent” ratings <br />Overall<br />By Item<br />
Demographic Characteristics of Residents<br />
Results<br />Overall mean percent “excellent” = 69.7% (SD = 40.4)<br />Items rated most frequently as “excellent”<br />Pai...
Training Year<br />Overall p = .015 <br />PGY 1 vs. PGY 2 p =.018 ; PGY 1 vs. PGY 3 = p =.004 ; PGY 2 vs. PGY 3 = p = .55 ...
Native Language<br />p = .06<br />
Gender<br />p = .81<br />
Limitations<br />Sample = Convenience sample of volunteering programs<br />Variability in the number of surveys collected ...
Advantages<br />Measures patient’s perspective<br />User friendly administration & scoring<br />Provides empirical measure...
Lessons Learned & Future Needs<br />Increase sample sizes<br />Evaluate changes over time<br />Consider efficacy of a mini...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) to Assess Communication Skills of Family Medicine Residents by Myerholtz, Simons, Felix, Nguyen, Brennan, Rivera-Tovar, Martin, Hepworth and Makoul

3,625 views
3,378 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,625
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
17
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
45
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) to Assess Communication Skills of Family Medicine Residents by Myerholtz, Simons, Felix, Nguyen, Brennan, Rivera-Tovar, Martin, Hepworth and Makoul

  1. 1. Using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) to Assess Communication Skills ofFamily Medicine Residents<br />Linda Myerholtz, Ph.D., Lynn Simons , Psy.D. , Sumi Felix, M.D., Tuan Nguyen, M.D. , Julie Brennan, Ph.D., Ana Rivera-Tovar, Ph.D., Pat Martin, PCC, Jeri Hepworth, Ph.D., Gregory Makoul, Ph.D. <br />
  2. 2. CAT<br />14-item patient satisfaction survey<br />Physician interpersonal and communication skills<br />Development based on sound psychometric methods<br />5-point rating scale:<br />1 = poor 2 = fair 3 = good 4 = very good 5 = excellent<br />Paper and pencil, phone, internet administration<br />Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang C. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: Development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns 2007; 67:333-342.<br />
  3. 3. Individualized Resident Sample Report<br />
  4. 4. Objectives<br />Gather benchmarking data for the use of the CAT in Family Medicine residency programs <br />Examine differences based on:<br />Year in training<br />Native language of the resident (native English speaking vs. non-native English speaking)<br />Gender<br />
  5. 5. Sample & Methods<br />Six Family Medicine residency programs <br />Midwest & East coast<br />Urban, suburban, rural communities<br />13-38 residents per program<br />127 residents <br />Data Collection: Nov 2008- Dec 2008<br />Paper and pencil version of the CAT<br />1,880 complete/useable surveys <br />
  6. 6. Scoring:<br />Mean ratings<br />Overall <br />By item<br />Percentage of “Excellent” ratings <br />Overall<br />By Item<br />
  7. 7. Demographic Characteristics of Residents<br />
  8. 8. Results<br />Overall mean percent “excellent” = 69.7% (SD = 40.4)<br />Items rated most frequently as “excellent”<br />Paid attention to me (73.6%)<br />Treated me with respect (72.8%)<br />Showed care and concern (72.6%)<br />Items rated least frequently as “excellent”<br />Encouraged me to ask questions (63.2%)<br />Involved me in decisions (64.9%)<br />Consistent with Makoul et al.’s findings for practicing physicians<br />
  9. 9. Training Year<br />Overall p = .015 <br />PGY 1 vs. PGY 2 p =.018 ; PGY 1 vs. PGY 3 = p =.004 ; PGY 2 vs. PGY 3 = p = .55 <br />
  10. 10. Native Language<br />p = .06<br />
  11. 11. Gender<br />p = .81<br />
  12. 12. Limitations<br />Sample = Convenience sample of volunteering programs<br />Variability in the number of surveys collected per resident<br />
  13. 13. Advantages<br />Measures patient’s perspective<br />User friendly administration & scoring<br />Provides empirical measure of core ACGME competency<br />Differentiates between residents <br />Easy to track changes over time<br />Benchmark data now available <br />
  14. 14. Lessons Learned & Future Needs<br />Increase sample sizes<br />Evaluate changes over time<br />Consider efficacy of a minimum passing score<br />58% has been recommended2<br />Continue to expand benchmarking data<br />2Wayne D, Cohen E, Makoul G, McGaghie W. The impact of judge selection on standard setting for a patient survey of physician communication skills. Acad Med 2008; 83: S17-20.<br />

×