The catalytic effect of multisource feedback for trauma teams: a pilot study

Background: Providing feedback and assessment to learners in the context of a dynamic trauma resuscitation is challenging. Multisource feedback (MSF) is a workplace-based assessment method whereby each interacting team member provides feedback to a specific individual. Despite the growing use of MSF in team-based medical specialties, it has not been studied in trauma teams. This work aims to measure MSFs impact on the practice change (catalytic effect) of trauma team captains (TTCs). Methods: This study took place between July 2019 and January 2020 at a level 1 trauma centre. TTCs were senior postgraduate medical residents and received either MSF from members of the trauma team following trauma cases or standard feedback. Following the reception of feedback, the impact on practice change was captured via questionnaires that were distributed immediately (Q1) and 3 weeks later (Q2). Comments were collected related to the perception of MSF in a trauma context. Results: Data collection was stopped after 24 TTCs participated as data saturation was achieved. Twelve received MSF, and 12 received standard feedback. Of the 12 TTCs in the standard feedback group, 7 (60%) reported receiving feedback, and the feedback was always delivered verbally by the faculty trauma team leader. All 12 TTCs in the MSF group received feedback. There was no significant difference in the catalytic effect of MSF compared with standard feedback, as measured by our questionnaires. Q1 found that both groups had positively influenced intention for practice change (4.1 on a 5-point Likert scale for the MSF group v. 4.4 for the standard feedback group, p = 0.05). Three weeks later, Q2 found a reduced intention for practice change in both groups (3.5 in the MSF group v. 3.4 in the standard feedback group, p = 0.64). Q2 also found a self-reported practice change that was similar in both groups (3.4 in the MSF group v. 3.0 in the standard feedback group, p = 0.38). When trauma team members who participated in MSF were questioned about the MSF process for TTCs, Likert scores ranged from 3.5 to 4.6, reflecting overall favourability. Narrative comments by team members who participated in the MSF process identified 4 major themes: logistics, usefulness, applicability and team. Although helpful was a comment frequently stated, analyses also identified efficiency and feasibility as MSFs main challenges in trauma. Conclusion: This pilot study found that MSF does not result in a self-reported catalytic