» Articles » PMID: 30798305

Experiential Knowledge of Risk and Support Factors for Physician Performance in Canada: a Qualitative Study

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2019 Feb 25
PMID 30798305
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To identify, understand and explain potential risk and protective factors that may influence individual and physician group performance, by accessing the experiential knowledge of physician-assessors at three medical regulatory authorities (MRAs) in Canada.

Design: Qualitative analysis of physician-assessors' interview transcripts. Telephone or in-person interviews were audio-recorded on consent, and transcribed verbatim. Interview questions related to four topics: Definition/discussion of what makes a 'high-quality physician;' factors for individual physician performance; factors for group physician performance; and recommendations on how to support high-quality medical practice. A grounded-theory approach was used to analyse the data.

Setting: Three provinces (Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario) in Canada.

Participants: Twenty-three (11 female, 12 male) physician-assessors from three MRAs in Canada (the College of Physicians & Surgeons of Alberta, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario).

Results: Participants outlined various protective factors for individual physician performance, including: being engaged in continuous quality improvement; having a support network of colleagues; working in a defined scope of practice; maintaining engagement in medicine; receiving regular feedback; and maintaining work-life balance. Individual risk factors included being money-oriented; having a high-volume practice; and practising in isolation. Group protective factors incorporated having regular communication among the group; effective collaboration; a shared philosophy of care; a diversity of physician perspectives; and appropriate practice management procedures. Group risk factors included: a lack of or ineffective communication/collaboration among the group; a group that doesn't empower change; or having one disruptive or 'risky' physician in the group.

Conclusions: This is the first qualitative inquiry to explore the experiential knowledge of physician-assessors related to physician performance. By understanding the risk and support factors for both individual physicians and groups, MRAs will be better-equipped to tailor physician assessments and limited resources to support competence and enhance physician performance.

Citing Articles

Designing a doctor evaluation index system for an online medical platform based on the information system success model in China.

Liu S, Zhang Y Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1185036.

PMID: 37900027 PMC: 10602723. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1185036.


Reclaiming physician identity: It's time to integrate 'Doctor as Person' into the CanMEDS framework.

Dagnone J, Glover Takahashi S, Whitehead C, Spadafora S Can Med Educ J. 2020; 11(4):e97-e99.

PMID: 32821309 PMC: 7417823. DOI: 10.36834/cmej.69182.


Survey of physician attitudes to using multisource feedback for competence assessment in Alberta.

Ashworth N, Kain N, Jess E, Mazurek K BMJ Open. 2020; 10(7):e037610.

PMID: 32690531 PMC: 7371216. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037610.


Primary care performance of alternatively licenced physicians in Ontario, Canada: a cross-sectional study using administrative data.

Hodwitz K, Thakkar N, Schultz S, Jaakkimainen L, Faulkner D, Yen W BMJ Open. 2019; 9(6):e026296.

PMID: 31189675 PMC: 6575712. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026296.

References
1.
Goulet F, Hudon E, Gagnon R, Gauvin E, Lemire F, Arsenault I . Effects of continuing professional development on clinical performance: results of a study involving family practitioners in Quebec. Can Fam Physician. 2013; 59(5):518-25. PMC: 3653659. View

2.
Wenghofer E, Marlow B, Campbell C, Carter L, Kam S, McCauley W . The relationship between physician participation in continuing professional development programs and physician in-practice peer assessments. Acad Med. 2014; 89(6):920-7. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000243. View

3.
Starks H, Trinidad S . Choose your method: a comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qual Health Res. 2007; 17(10):1372-80. DOI: 10.1177/1049732307307031. View

4.
Wenghofer E, Klass D, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee D, Jacques A, Smee S . Doctor scores on national qualifying examinations predict quality of care in future practice. Med Educ. 2009; 43(12):1166-73. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03534.x. View

5.
Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee D, Wenghofer E, Jacques A, Klass D . Physician scores on a national clinical skills examination as predictors of complaints to medical regulatory authorities. JAMA. 2007; 298(9):993-1001. DOI: 10.1001/jama.298.9.993. View