Show simple item record

Teaching the One-minute Preceptor

dc.contributor.authorFurney, Scott L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorOrsini, Alex N.en_US
dc.contributor.authorOrsetti, Kym E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorStern, David T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGruppen, Larry D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorIrby, David M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T19:33:45Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T19:33:45Z
dc.date.issued2001-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationFurney, Scott L.; Orsini, Alex N.; Orsetti, Kym E.; Stern, David T.; Gruppen, Larry D.; Irby, David M. (2001). "Teaching the One-minute Preceptor." Journal of General Internal Medicine 16(9): 620-624. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72699>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0884-8734en_US
dc.identifier.issn1525-1497en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72699
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=11556943&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThe One-Minute Preceptor (OMP) model of faculty development is used widely to improve teaching, but its effect on teaching behavior has not been assessed. We aim to evaluate the effect of this intervention on residents' teaching skills. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Inpatient teaching services at both a tertiary care hospital and a Veterans Administration Medical Center affiliated with a University Medical Center. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 57 second- and third-year internal medicine residents that were randomized to the intervention group ( n = 28) or to the control group ( n = 29). INTERVENTION: The intervention was a 1-hour session incorporating lecture, group discussion, and role-play. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome measures were resident self-report and learner ratings of resident performance of the OMP teaching behaviors. Residents assigned to the intervention group reported statistically significant changes in all behaviors ( P < .05). Eighty-seven percent of residents rated the intervention as “useful or very useful” on a 1–5 point scale with a mean of 4.28. Student ratings of teacher performance showed improvements in all skills except “Teaching General Rules.” Learners of the residents in the intervention group reported increased motivation to do outside reading when compared to learners of the control residents. Ratings of overall teaching effectiveness were not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The OMP model is a brief and easy-to-administer intervention that provides modest improvements in residents' teaching skills.en_US
dc.format.extent406918 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Science Incen_US
dc.rightsBlackwell Science Incen_US
dc.subject.otherMedical Educationen_US
dc.subject.otherInternship and Residencyen_US
dc.subject.otherEducational Modelsen_US
dc.subject.otherFeedbacken_US
dc.titleTeaching the One-minute Preceptoren_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelInternal Medicine and Specialtiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumReceived from the Department of Internal Medicine (SLF, ANO, KEO, DTS) and the Department of Medical Education (LDG), University of Michigan Health System, and the Ann Arbor VA Medical Center (DTS), Ann Arbor, Mich; and the University of California (DMI), San Francisco, Calif.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid11556943en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72699/1/j.1525-1497.2001.016009620.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009620.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of General Internal Medicineen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilkerson L, Lesky L, Medio F. The resident as teacher during work rounds. J Med Educ. 1986; 61: 823 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTonesk X. The house officer as a teacher: what schools expect and measure. J Med Educ. 1979; 54: 613 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJewett LS, Greenberg LW, Goldberg RM. Teaching residents how to teach: a one-year study. J Med Educ. 1982; 57: 361 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilkerson L & Irby DM. Strategies for improving teaching practices: a comprehensive approach to faculty development. Acad Med. 1998; 73: 387 – 96.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpickard A, Corbett EC, Schorling JB. Improving residents' teaching skills and attitudes toward teaching. J Gen Intern Med. 1996; 11: 475 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNeher JO, Gordon KC, Meyer B, Stevens N. A five-step “microskills” model of clinical teaching. Clin Teach. 1992; 5: 419 – 24.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLitzelman D, Stratos G, Marriot D, Skeff K. Factorial validation of a widely disseminated educational framework for evaluating clinical teachers. Acad Med. 1998; 73: 688 – 95.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuber PJ. The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under non-standard conditions. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1967; 1: 221 – 33.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIrby D. How attending physicians make instructional decisions when conducting teaching rounds. Acad Med. 1992; 67: 630 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIrby D. What clinical teachers in medicine need to know. Acad Med. 1994; 69: 333 – 42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIrby D & Rakestraw P. Evaluating clinical teaching in medicine. J Med Educ. 1981; 56: 181 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEnde J. Feedback in clinical medical education. JAMA. 1983; 250: 777 – 81.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHewson M & Little M. Giving feedback in medical education: verification of recommended techniques. J Gen Intern Med. 1998; 13: 111 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSkeff K. Evaluation of a method for improving the teaching performance of attending physicians. Am J Med. 1983; 75: 465 – 70.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.