Introduction: There is a growing interest in providing clinicians with performance reports via audit and feedback (A&F). Despite significant evidence exists to support A&F as a tool for self-reflection and identifying unperceived learning needs, there are many questions that remain such as the optimal content of the A&F reports, the method of dissemination for emergency physicians (EP) and the perceived benefit. The goal of the project was to 1. evaluate EP perceptions regarding satisfaction with A&F reports and its’ ability to stimulate physicians to identify opportunities for practice change and 2. identify areas for optimization of the A&F reports. Methods: EP practicing at any of the four adult hospital sites in Calgary were eligible. We conducted a web survey using a modified Dillman technique eliciting EP perspectives regarding satisfaction, usefulness and suggestions for improvement regarding the A&F reports. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and free-text were subjected to thematic analysis. Results: From 2015 onwards, EP could access their clinical performance data via an online dashboard. Despite the online reports being available, few physicians reviewed their reports stating access and perceived lack of utility as a barrier. In October 2016, we began disseminated static performance reports to all EP containing a subset of 10 clinical and operational performance metrics via encrypted e-mail. These static reports provided clinician with their performance with peer comparator data (anonymized), rationale and evidence for A&F, information on how to use the report and how to obtain continuing medical education credits for reviewing the report. Conclusion: Of 177 EP in Calgary, we received 49 completed surveys (response rate 28%). 86% of the respondents were very/satisfied with the report. 88% of EP stated they would take action based on the report including self-reflection (91%) and modifying specific aspects of their practice (63%). Respondents indicated that by receiving static reports, 77% were equally or more likely to visit the online version of the eA&F tool. The vast majority of EP felt that receiving the A&F reports on a semi-annual basis was preferred. Three improvements were made to the eA&F based on survey results: 1) addition of trend over time data, 2) new clinical metrics, and 3) optimization of report layout. We also initiated a separate, real-time 72-hour bounceback electronic notification system based on the feedback. EP value the dissemination of clinical performance indicators both in static report and dashboard format. Eliciting feedback from clinicians allows iterative optimization of eA&F. Based on these results, we plan to continue to provide physicians with A&F reports on a semi-annual basis.