Observing bedside rounds for faculty development. (22nd February 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mookherjee, Somnath; Cabrera, Daniel; McKinney, Christy M; Kaplan, Elizabeth; Robins, Lynne
• Is Part Of: Clinical teacher. Volume 14:Number 6(2017)
• Page Start: 446
• Page End: 450
• Publication Date: 2017-02-22
• Subjects: Medical education -- Periodicals; Medical education -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; 610.711
• DOI: 10.1111/tct.12614
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-4971

Abstract

Summary: Background: Bedside rounds are an ideal opportunity for clinical teaching. We previously offered faculty development on balancing learner autonomy, patient care and teaching. We noticed that participants often asked whether attending physicians and learners shared the same perceptions of the key elements (patient‐centredness, efficiency and educational value) of bedside rounds. Understanding these perceptions and identifying areas of discordance would inform faculty development for optimal bedside rounds. Methods: At a university hospital we observed 16 attending physicians and 47 learners over 112 patient encounters. We noted the length of rounds and the number of interruptions. Participants were surveyed on their perception of the attending physicians' efficacy in preparing the team for rounds, and the efficiency and educational value of the rounds. Bedside rounds are an ideal opportunity for clinical teaching Findings: After the same rounds, compared with the attending physicians, learners perceived the patient‐centredness, efficiency and educational value of the rounds to be significantly higher. Learners rated attending physicians higher than attending physicians did themselves on learner autonomy, appropriate supervision, conferring responsibility for the care plan to learners and not interrupting. There was no correlation between interruptions and length of the rounds, or learner or attending physician perception of key elements of the rounds. Learners tended to attribute greater efficacy to attending physicians for team preparation than attending physicians did themselves. Conclusion: We identified salient beliefs and practices on bedside teaching. Our findings suggest that identifying shared goals and expectations, and creating metrics to define successful rounds, may help attending physicians to better synergize with learners. Interruptions need not be eschewed completely for the purpose of achieving efficient rounds. Integrating these measures into faculty development may bolster the quality of bedside rounds.