Background Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement. Nevertheless, residents receive too little of it during postgraduate clinical education. Currently mandatory annual professional development reviews are perceived as inadequate by residents. Objective In order to make clinical feedback more frequently available, structured clinical feedback conversations were introduced in 2018 in the Department of Anesthesiology at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) in postgraduate education to accompany clinical workplace rotations. Methods The effect of the introduction of these feedback conversations was evaluated by conducting a survey among residents before (time t0) and after (time t1) the introduction regarding general perceptions of received feedback, any desire for more clinical feedback and general job satisfaction. The research question was if the introduction of feedback conversations could improve satisfaction of received feedback on job performance and overall job satisfaction among the residents. Results Approximately half of the residents (t0 51%; t1 44%) participated in the surveys. At t0 64% initially judged the annual professional development reviews to be inadequate as a feedback tool. At t1 on average, 3.4 feedback conversations (mean 2) took place per resident, each lasting 10.4 min (mean 10 min). After the introduction of the feedback conversations, however, 84% viewed it as a more useful tool and 78% felt that the feedback conversations took place in an appreciative and respectful atmosphere. In comparison before and after the introduction of the feedback conversations the residents increasingly felt they knew how their supervisors assessed their practical skills (p = 0.017), were treated by their supervisors as they desired (p = 0.039) and were more likely to be able to easily present their own criticisms and suggestions for improvement (p = 0.033); however, no improvement could be observed in general job satisfaction. Conclusion In contrast to the mandatory annual professional development reviews, multiple feedback conversations per year are generally welcomed by the residents and recognized as a teaching tool for providing feedback. These feedback conversations also create a forum in which residents can more easily provide feedback to superiors. Thus, feedback conversations appear to contribute to a feedback culture and an appreciative and respectful working environment.

Feedbackgespräche in der Weiterbildung

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2026年6月24日

查看全文

Nicolas Hoffmann,
Martin Klasen,
Katharina Röher,
Saša Sopka

摘要

Background

Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement. Nevertheless, residents receive too little of it during postgraduate clinical education. Currently mandatory annual professional development reviews are perceived as inadequate by residents.

Objective

In order to make clinical feedback more frequently available, structured clinical feedback conversations were introduced in 2018 in the Department of Anesthesiology at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) in postgraduate education to accompany clinical workplace rotations.

Methods

The effect of the introduction of these feedback conversations was evaluated by conducting a survey among residents before (time t₀) and after (time t₁) the introduction regarding general perceptions of received feedback, any desire for more clinical feedback and general job satisfaction. The research question was if the introduction of feedback conversations could improve satisfaction of received feedback on job performance and overall job satisfaction among the residents.

Results

Approximately half of the residents (t₀ 51%; t₁ 44%) participated in the surveys. At t₀ 64% initially judged the annual professional development reviews to be inadequate as a feedback tool. At t₁ on average, 3.4 feedback conversations (mean 2) took place per resident, each lasting 10.4 min (mean 10 min). After the introduction of the feedback conversations, however, 84% viewed it as a more useful tool and 78% felt that the feedback conversations took place in an appreciative and respectful atmosphere. In comparison before and after the introduction of the feedback conversations the residents increasingly felt they knew how their supervisors assessed their practical skills (p = 0.017), were treated by their supervisors as they desired (p = 0.039) and were more likely to be able to easily present their own criticisms and suggestions for improvement (p = 0.033); however, no improvement could be observed in general job satisfaction.

Conclusion

In contrast to the mandatory annual professional development reviews, multiple feedback conversations per year are generally welcomed by the residents and recognized as a teaching tool for providing feedback. These feedback conversations also create a forum in which residents can more easily provide feedback to superiors. Thus, feedback conversations appear to contribute to a feedback culture and an appreciative and respectful working environment.