Volume 19 Issue 5
May  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Chinese Journal of General Practice  > 2021  >  19(5): 841-845
LI Jian, PIAO Hui-hong, LIU Ying-ying, XIE Mian, CHEN Xi, CHEN Chao. The evaluation instruments of the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter-A systemic review[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(5): 841-845. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001931
Citation: LI Jian, PIAO Hui-hong, LIU Ying-ying, XIE Mian, CHEN Xi, CHEN Chao. The evaluation instruments of the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter-A systemic review[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(5): 841-845. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001931
shu

The evaluation instruments of the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter-A systemic review

doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001931
  • 1.

    Department of General Practice, the First Affiliated Hospital of South University of Science and Technology/Shenzhen People's Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518020, China

  • Received Date: 2020-03-28
    Available Online: 2022-02-16
    Abstract
  •   Objective  The development of general practitioners has been highly valued by the state. It is an urgent scientific problem to objectively evaluate the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter. The key to solve the problem is to establish a quantitative evaluation instrument (scale) for general practitioners' ability for the patient encounter. This article systematically reviews the quantitative evaluation instruments for the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter at home and abroad, and provides the basis for establishing the Chinese instrument.  Methods  Using PubMed, FMRS, ChinaNet, Wanfang and other data resources, the relevant literature about the evaluation instruments of the general practitioner's ability for the patient encounter from January 1978 to March 2020 were searched. After browsing and screening, most relevant articles were included for analysis and review.  Results  A total of 686 papers were retrieved, 108 articles were screened out by browsing abstracts, and 43 references were screened out by reading the full text. The evaluation instrument of the ability for the patient encounter for the medical license examination was often used to evaluate the ability for the patient encounter of general practitioners. There were few and imperfect instruments dedicated to the evaluation of the ability for the patient encounter of general practitioners. The United Kingdom and the United States had established a more advanced evaluation instruments of the ability for the patient encounter in the medical license examination, however, the scales had not been made public, and the examination methods had been used to evaluate the ability of the patient encounter for general practitioners. The published evaluation instruments related to the general practitioner's ability of the patient encounter mainly included Leicester assessment package, MAAS scale and Davis Observation Code. All of these instruments had shortcomings. Leicester assessment package was a widely translated evaluation instrument for general practitioners in China, but its inherent defects still existed.  Conclusion  It is a historical task for Chinese scholars in general practice to establish a set of scientific and practical evaluation instruments for the ability of the patient encounter for general practitioners.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(43)
  • [1]
    习近平. 习近平在中国共产党第十九次全国代表大会上的报告[Z]. (2017-10-18)[2020-05-06]. http://www.china.com.cn/19da/2017-10/27/content_41805113.htm.
    [2]
    贺红梅, 刘秀梅. 如何接诊: 当全科医生的第一课[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2017, 16(8): 654. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2017.08.024
    [3]
    HARDEN R M. Assess clinical competence-an overview [J]. Med teach, 1979, 1(6): 289-296. doi: 10.3109/01421597909014338
    [4]
    HARDEN R M, GLEESON F A. Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)[J]. Med Educ, 1979, 13(1): 41-54. http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=763183&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fqhc%2F19%2FSuppl_2%2Fi34.atom
    [5]
    HARDEN R M. Revisiting 'Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)[J]. Med Educ, 2016, 50(4): 376-379. doi: 10.1111/medu.12801
    [6]
    PUGH D, TOUCHIE C, HUMPHREY-MURTO S, et al. The OSCE progress test-Measuring clinical skill development over residency training[J]. Med Teach, 2015, 38(2): 168-173. doi: 10.3109/0142159x.2015.1029895
    [7]
    SAKURAI H, KANADA Y, SUGIURA Y, et al. OSCE-based clinical skill education for physical and occupational therapists[J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26(9): 1387-1397. doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.1387
    [8]
    WHELAN G P, BOULET J R, MCKINLEY D W, et al. Scoring standardized patient examinations: lessons learned from the development and administration of the ECFMG Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) [J]. Med Teach, 2005, 27(3): 200-206. doi: 10.1080/01421590500126296
    [9]
    MCKINELEY D, HESS B, BOULET J, et al. Examining changes in certification/licensure requirements and the international medical graduate examinee pool[J]. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 2014, 19(1): 19-28. doi: 10.1007/s10459-013-9456-6
    [10]
    CHAMBERS K A, BOULET J R, GARY N E. The management of patient encounter time in a high-stakes assessment using standardized patients[J]. Med Educ, 2000, 34(10): 813-817. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00752.x
    [11]
    AYERS W, BOULET J. Establishing the validity of test score inferences: performance of 4th-year U.S. medical students on the ECFMG Clinical Skills Assessment[J]. Teach Learn Med, 2001, 13(4): 214-220. doi: 10.1207/S15328015TLM1304_01
    [12]
    NORCINI J J, BLANK L L, ARNOLD G K, et al. The mini-CEX (clinical evaluation exercise): a preliminary investigation[J]. Ann Intern Med, 1995, 123(10): 795-799. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-123-10-199511150-00008
    [13]
    ANSARI A A, ALI S K, DONONNON T. The construct and criterion validity of the mini-CEX: a meta-analysis of the published research[J]. Acad Med, 2013, 88(3): 413-420. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318280a953
    [14]
    EGGLETON K, GOODYEAR-SMITH F, PATON L, et al. Reliability of Mini-CEX assessment of medical students in general practice clinical attachments[J]. Fam Med, 2016, 48(8): 624-630. http://www.stfm.org/Portals/49/Documents/FMPDF/FamilyMedicineVol48Issue8Eggleton624.pdf
    [15]
    FRASER R C, MCKINELEY R K, MULHOLLAND H. Consultation competence in general practice: establishing the face validity of prioritized criteria in the Leicester assessment package[J]. Br J Gen Pract, 1994, 44(380): 109-113. http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_McKinley/publication/14995584_Consultation_competence_in_general_practice_Establishing_the_face_validity_of_prioritized_criteria_in_the_Leicester_assessment_package/links/02bfe513dbab761306000000.pdf
    [16]
    FRASER R C, MCKINLEY R K, MULLHOLLAND H. Consultation competence in general practice: testing the reliability of the Leicester assessment package[J]. Br J Gen Pract, 1994, 44(384): 293-296. http://bjgp.org/content/44/384/293.full-text.pdf
    [17]
    FRASER R C, MCKINLEY R K, MULLHOLLAND H. Leicester assessment package[J]. Br J Gen Pract, 1995, 45(393): 221. http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC1239117
    [18]
    MCKINLEY R K, FRASER R C, VAN DER VLEUTE C, et al. Formative assessment of the consultation performance of medical students in the setting of general practice using a modified version of the Leicester assessment package[J]. Med Educ, 2000, 34(7): 573-579. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00490.x
    [19]
    CAMPBELL L M, MURRAY T S. Leicester assessment package[J]. Br J Gen Pract, 1994, 44(388): 535.
    [20]
    CALLAHAN E J, BERTAKIS K D. Development and validation of the Davis Observation Code[J]. Fam Med, 1991, 23(1): 19-24.
    [21]
    BERTAKIS K D, CALLAHAN E J. A comparison of initial and established patient encounters using the Davis Observation Code [J]. Fam Med, 1992, 24(4): 307-311. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/1601243
    [22]
    ROBINSON J, WALLEY T, PEARSON M, et al. Measuring consultation skills in primary care in England: evaluation and development of content of the MAAS scale [J]. Br J Gen Pract, 2002, 52(484): 889-893. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1314439/pdf/12434956.pdf?origin=publication_detail
    [23]
    VAN ES J M, Schrijver C J, Oberink R H, et al. Two-dimensional structure of the MAAS-Global rating list for consultation skills of doctors[J]. Med Teach, 2012, 34(12): e794-e99. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.709652
    [24]
    REGISTER S, BLANCHARD E, BELLE A, et al. Using AIDETⓇ Education Simulations to Improve Patient Experience Scores[J]. Clin Simul Nurs, 2020, 38: 14-17. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2019.09.005
    [25]
    医学教育网. 临床执业医师实践技能技能考试内容包括那些?[Z]. (2019-11-24)[2020-05-06]. https://www.med66.com/shijianjineng/kaoshishijian/sh1911241731.shtml.
    [26]
    陈亮, 夏秀萍, 何达. 标准化病人在助理全科医生门诊接诊能力培训中的应用效果分析[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2015, 14(10): 790-793.
    [27]
    江孙芳, 张渊, 周容, 等. 标准化病人在全科住院医师接诊医患交流技能培训中的应用[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2010, 9(8): 525-528. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2010.08.006
    [28]
    李慧, 彭明辉, 傅士杰, 等. 上海市规范化培训全科医生社区卫生服务能力评估研究[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2016, 15(9): 672-676. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2016.09.005
    [29]
    陈丽芬, 贾建国, 路孝琴. 列斯特评估量表及其在全科医生应诊能力评价中的应用[J]. 中国全科医学, 2016, 19(4): 447-450. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2016.04.018
    [30]
    高青, 朱旬, 高雅, 等. 基于莱斯特评估套件的全科医生技能培训效果评价研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2017, 20(16): 1987-1993. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.16.017
    [31]
    魏学娟, 吴浩, 葛彩英, 等. 莱斯特评估套件在全科医生培训中的应用[J]. 中国全科医学, 2017, 20(25): 3149-3152. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.25.018
    [32]
    陈亮, 张维维, 夏秀萍, 等. 莱斯特评估包在全科医生门诊接诊能力培训中的应用效果分析[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2018, 17(7): 557-559. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2018.07.016
    [33]
    封玉琴, 张芳. 基于莱斯特评估套件的全科医生技能培训效果评价解析[J]. 山西医药杂志, 2019, 48(11): 1351-1352. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9926.2019.11.038
    [34]
    李树然, 耿小鹿, 蔡祖祥, 等. 全科医生实施标准化全科诊疗路径成效分析[J]. 中国初级卫生保健, 2015, 29(4): 25-28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-568X.2015.04.0009
    [35]
    李珞畅, 陈鸿雁, 何英, 等. 全科医生转岗培训统一结业考试实践性研究[J]. 中华全科医学, 2017, 15(4): 685-686, 707. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYQY201704043.htm
    [36]
    孙晨, 路孝琴. 以人为中心的全科医生应诊服务评价指标体系构建研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2017, 20(7): 773-778. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.07.003
    [37]
    王美荣, 杜娟, 刘英杰, 等. 基于层次分析法的全科医生规范化培养全科医疗应诊能力评价指标体系权重研究[J]. 中国医药导报, 2018, 15(9): 172-175. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YYCY201809042.htm
    [38]
    王美荣, 葛彩英, 张丹丹, 等. 全科医学规范化培养学员全科医疗应诊能力评价指标体系构建[J]. 医学与社会, 2018, 31(4): 70-73. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXSH201804022.htm
    [39]
    王美荣, 杜娟, 刘英杰, 等. 全科医学规范化培训应诊能力评价指标体系探索[J]. 医学教育管理, 2019, 5(5): 449-454. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-045X.2019.05.014
    [40]
    甘仁榕, 朱焱. 贵阳市社区全科医生应诊能力研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2019, 22(31): 3825-3829. doi: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2019.00.283
    [41]
    李健. 全科医学基本原理[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2017.
    [42]
    李健. 全科医学临床思维训练-病案讨论集[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2018.
    [43]
    李健, 刘莹莹, 宋代, 等. 社区家庭医生团队全科医学临床能力研究[Z]. 中华医学会全科医学分会第四届全国会议(成都), 2017.
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索
    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (457) PDF downloads(33) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    Address：No. 287, Changhuai Road, Bengbu, Anhui Province, 233004, P.R.ChinaphoneNo：0552-3066635； 0552-3051890Email：zhqkyx@163.com

    Copyright © Chinese Journal of General Practice皖ICP备2020018345号-2

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.    

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return