Verifying appraisal evidence using feedback from trained peers: views and experiences of Scottish GP appraisers.

Background: GP appraisal is currently considered inadequate because it lacks robustness. Objective assessment of appraisal evidence is needed to enable judgements on professional performance to be made.

Aim: To determine GP appraisers' views of the acceptability, feasibility, and educational impact of external peer feedback received on three core appraisal activities undertaken as part of this study.

Design Of Study: Independent peer review and cross-sectional postal questionnaire study.

Setting: NHS Scotland.

Method: One of three core appraisal activities (criterion audit, significant event analysis, or video of consultations) was undertaken by GP appraisers and subjected to peer review by trained colleagues. A follow-up postal questionnaire elicited participants' views on the potential acceptability, feasibility, and educational impact of this approach.

Results: Of 164 appraisers, 80 agreed to participate; 67/80 (84%) submitted one of three appraisal materials for peer review and returned completed questionnaires. For significant event analyses (n = 44), most responders believed the peer feedback method was feasible (100%) and fair (92.5%) and would add value to appraisal (95.5%). Peer feedback on criterion audits (n = 15) was believed to be acceptable and fair (93.3%) and it was thought it would be a useful educational tool (100%). Completing a consultation video (n = 8) was perceived to be feasible as part of normal general practice (n = 5). It was unanimously agreed that assessment of videos by peers has educational impact and would help improve appraisal.

Conclusion: This group of GP appraisers strongly supported the role of external and independent feedback by trained peers as one approach to strengthening the existing appraisal process.