How psychiatrists’ attitudes towards multi-source feedback including patient feedback influenced the educational value: a qualitative study

Abstract

Background: Multi-source feedback (MSF) is well-established in psychiatric training. However, evidence on the educational impact is not definitive and there is scanty evidence exploring its value for professional development of psychiatry trainees in the United Kingdom (UK). Evidence suggests the MSF tool currently used is not suitable for specialist trainees. This qualitative research project explored psychiatric doctors’ attitudes towards MSF with patient feedback, to determine how this influenced the feedback’s educational usefulness. Methods: A qualitative study using a phenomenological approach based on a constructivist approach. Purposive sampling identified trainee psychiatrists who completed a more extensive MSF, including patient feedback, than they currently use. They discussed their results in supervised sessions to plan how to use the feedback. Semi-structured interviews were conducted separately with trainees and their supervisors following completion of MSF. The data was analysed thematically. The study was completed in 2020. Results: Seven trainees and five supervisors participated. Four themes were identified. Most had positive opinions about the educational usefulness of MSF, including patient feedback, and made changes to their behaviour following the feedback. Interviewees valued patient feedback and identified it as important in psychiatry. Most valued their patient feedback over their colleague feedback. The complexities of patient feedback in psychiatry and how this may influence the educational usefulness of the feedback were discussed in detail. Conclusions: Findings suggest a need to review the current system of MSF in psychiatry in order to maximise educational benefits. In particular, this research points to the benefits of psychiatric trainees engaging with patient feedback.