GROUP PEER-REVIEW - A QUESTIONNAIRE-BASED SURVEY

Objective: This paper presents the findings from a questionnaire-based survey of psychiatrists designed to elucidate the positive and negati ve aspects of group peer review and its perceived place in accountabil ity procedures, and to provide information about how accountability th rough group peer review might be improved. Method: Three hundred and e ighty-eight psychiatrists were surveyed via mailout questionnaire. Dem ographic data, details of groups, and perceptions of beneficial and de trimental effects of group peer review were sought from group particip ants and non-participants. Attitudes of participants were compared wit h those of non-participants. Features of groups related to satisfactio n in participants were examined. Results: The majority of the 170 resp ondents participating in groups regarded peer review as a means of mai ntaining and improving skills, sharing ideas and methods, receiving co nstructive criticism and feedback, of educational benefit and an impor tant source of professional accountability. Non-participants, while le ss positive overall, responded equally that participation in peer revi ew groups would be an effective response to accountability procedures. Potential detrimental effects and problems with the functioning of pe er review groups were elucidated. Conclusions: Group peer review contr ibutes significantly to professional accountability and education in w ell-functioning groups. Further strategies for the facilitation of gro up functioning and for the processing of problems arising in group pee r review need to be developed to optimise its contribution to the main tenance and improvement of professional standards.