Psychiatry peer review groups in Australia: a mixed-methods exploration of structure and function

Abstract

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine Australian psychiatrists’ experience of participation in a small group learning format of continuing professional development, known as peer review groups (PRGs), with a particular emphasis on group structure and functions.MethodAn exploratory mixed-methods study comprising a survey (n=77) and semistructured interviews (n=6) with Australian psychiatrists participating in a PRG in the previous 12 months.ResultsQualitative findings indicate that PRGs address experiential learning through a focus on both breadth and specificity of work, as well as participants’ experiences. Participants described using PRGs as a forum to manage difficult and complex work (through critiquing work, learning from one another, considering theory and guidelines, benchmarking, validating, reflecting and generalising learning) and to manage stress and well-being associated with crises, everyday stress and professional isolation. Particular structural aspects of PRGs considered essential to achieve these functions were self-selection of members, self-direction of meeting content and provision of a safe environment. These findings were convergent with the quantitative findings from scale survey data. Difficulties experienced during PRG participation are also described.ConclusionQualitative and quantitative findings from psychiatry PRGs demonstrate how practice-based professional experience functions as both a source of learning and of collegial connection that contributes to well-being and reduction in professional stress. Study limitations and future research directions are discussed.

Navigating the Minefield: Managing Refusal of Medical Care in Older Adults with Chronic Symptoms of Mental Illness

“… 86 Peer review groups in psychiatry are another helpful means of discussing the inherent uncertainty and complexities of these cases. 87 …”

“…86 Peer review groups in psychiatry are another helpful means of discussing the inherent uncertainty and complexities of these cases. 87 Education and training of clinicians to better understand and manage the complexity of treatment refusal is needed. Research has highlighted poor awareness among clinicians of human rights frameworks, 71,72 and inadequate knowledge of capacity assessment 24 and relevant legislative frameworks to manage treatment refusal.…”

Understanding how and why quality circles improve standards of practice, enhance professional development and increase psychological well-being of general practitioners: a realist synthesis

“…Peers create new ideas and the cooperation and mutual appreciation that results improve their psychological well-being, increase their self-esteem, and may reduce their risk of burnout (CMO configurations 4 a and 4 c, e in figure 2). 1 45–48…”

Imposter syndrome in doctors beyond training: a narrative review

“…Lessons can be derived from functionality of psychiatric peer review groups, described by participants as safe spaces to discuss complex cases and adverse events. 17 Peer support may be a buffer of IS. However, while these individual and systemic solutions for IS make intuitive sense, we have no empirical data about their efficacy, suggesting future studies to justify resources directed towards dealing with this insidious phenomenon.…”