Professionalism in general practice: development of an instrument to assess professional behaviour in general practitioner trainees

Introduction  The aim of this study is to develop a new tool to assess professional behaviour in general practitioner (GP) trainees: the evaluation of professional behaviour in general practice (EPRO‐GP) instrument. Methods  Our study consisted of 4 phases: (1) development of a model of professional...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical education 2006-01, Vol.40 (1), p.43-50
Hauptverfasser: van de Camp, Kalinka, Vernooij-Dassen, Myrra, Grol, Richard, Bottema, Ben
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction  The aim of this study is to develop a new tool to assess professional behaviour in general practitioner (GP) trainees: the evaluation of professional behaviour in general practice (EPRO‐GP) instrument. Methods  Our study consisted of 4 phases: (1) development of a model of professionalism in general practice based on a literature review on professionalism, competency models of general practice and the overall educational objectives of postgraduate training for general practice; (2) development of the EPRO‐GP instrument in collaboration with a sounding board; (3) establishing the content validity of the EPRO‐GP instrument using a nominal group technique; and (4) establishing the feasibility of the EPRO‐GP instrument in 12 general practice trainees and their general practice trainers. Results  The model of professionalism in general practice encompassed 4 themes within professionalism: (a) professionalism towards the patient; (b) professionalism towards other professionals; (c) professionalism towards the public; and (d) professionalism towards oneself. These 4 themes covered 26 elements of professionalism. This model provided the framework of the EPRO‐GP instrument, which we developed further by operationalising the 26 elements in 127 behavioural items. The expert ratings confirmed the content validity of the instrument with one exception: the element ‘altruism’ was removed as a stand‐alone category but it remained throughout the tool in items giving primacy to patient welfare. The results on the feasibility of the EPRO‐GP instrument were very encouraging. All tutorials yielded professional behaviour learning points. Discussion  Our results support the content validity of the EPRO‐GP instrument as well as its feasibility as a tool to educate for professionalism in general practice.
ISSN:0308-0110
1365-2923
DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02346.x