Dataset Information

The learners' perspective on internal medicine ward rounds: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Ward rounds form an integral part of Internal Medicine teaching. This study aimed to determine the trainees' opinions regarding various aspects of their ward rounds, including how well they cover their learning needs, how they would like the rounds to be conducted, and differences of opinion between medical students and postgraduates.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on a total of 134 trainees in Internal Medicine, comprising medical students, interns, residents and fellows, who were asked to fill in a structured, self-designed questionnaire. Most of the responses required a rating on a scale of 1-5 (1 being highly unsatisfactory and 5 being highly satisfactory).

Results

Teaching of clinical skills and bedside teaching received the lowest overall mean score (Mean +/- SD 2.48 +/- 1.02 and 2.49 +/- 1.12 respectively). They were rated much lower by postgraduates as compared to students (p < 0.001). All respondents felt that management of patients was the aspect best covered by the current ward rounds (Mean +/- SD 3.71 +/- 0.72). For their desired ward rounds, management of patients received the highest score (Mean +/- SD 4.64 +/- 0.55), followed by bedside examinations (Mean +/- SD 4.60 +/- 0.61) and clinical skills teaching (Mean +/- SD 4.50 +/- 0.68). The postgraduates desired a lot more focus on communication skills, counselling and medical ethics as compared to students, whose primary focus was teaching of bedside examination and management. A majority of the respondents (87%) preferred bedside rounds over conference room rounds. Even though the duration of rounds was found to be adequate, a majority of the trainees (68%) felt there was a lack of individual attention during ward rounds.

Conclusions

This study highlights important areas where ward rounds need improvement in order to maximize their benefit to the learners. There is a need to modify the current state of ward rounds in order to address the needs and expectations of trainees.

SUBMITTER: Tariq M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2912319 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The learners' perspective on internal medicine ward rounds: a cross-sectional study.

Tariq Muhammad M Motiwala Afaq A Ali Syed Umer SU Riaz Mehmood M Awan Safia S Akhter Jaweed J

BMC medical education 20100709

<h4>Background</h4>Ward rounds form an integral part of Internal Medicine teaching. This study aimed to determine the trainees' opinions regarding various aspects of their ward rounds, including how well they cover their learning needs, how they would like the rounds to be conducted, and differences of opinion between medical students and postgraduates.<h4>Methods</h4>A cross-sectional study was conducted on a total of 134 trainees in Internal Medicine, comprising medical students, interns, resi ...[more]

PMID: 20618929

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe capacity of general internal medicine (GIM) clinical teaching units has been strained by decreasing resident supply and increasing patient demand. The objective of our study was to compare the number of residents (supply) with the volume and duration of patient care activities (demand) to identify inefficiency.MethodsUsing the most recently available data from an academic teaching hospital in Toronto, Ontario, we identified each occurrence of a set of patient care activities that took place on the clinical teaching unit from 2015 to 2019. We completed a descriptive analysis of the frequencies of these activities and how the frequencies varied by hour, day, week, month and year. Patient care activities included admissions, rounds, responding to pages, meeting with patients and their families, patient transfers, discharges and responding to cardiac arrests. The estimated time to complete each task was based on the available data in our electronic medical record system and interviews with GIM physicians and trainees. To calculate resident utilization, the person-hours of patient care tasks was divided by the person-hours of resident supply. Resident utilization was computed for 3 scenarios corresponding to varying levels of resident absenteeism.ResultsDuring the study period, there were 14 581 consultations to GIM from the emergency department. Patient volumes tended to be highest during January and lowest during May and June, and highest on Monday morning and lowest on Friday night. Daily admissions to hospital from the emergency department were higher on weekdays than on weekends, and hourly admissions peaked at 8 am and between 3 pm and 1 am. Weekday resident utilization was generally highest between 8 am and 2 pm, and lowest between 1 am and 8 am. In a scenario in which all residents were present apart from those who were post-call, resident utilization generally never exceeded 100%; in scenarios in which at least 1 resident was absent owing to illness or vacation, it was common for resident utilization to approach or exceed 100%, particularly during daytime working hours.InterpretationAnalyzing supply and demand on a GIM ward has allowed us to identify periods when supply and demand are not aligned and to demonstrate empirically the vulnerability of current staffing models. These data have the potential to inform and optimize scheduling on an internal medicine ward.

Project description:BackgroundThe identification of infection in an internal medicine ward is crucial but not always straightforward. Eosinopenia has been proposed as a marker of infection, but specific cutoffs for prediction are not established yet. We aim to assess whether there is difference in eosinophil count between infected and noninfected patients and, if so, the best cutoffs to differentiate them.MethodsCross-sectional, observational study with analysis of all patients admitted to an Internal Medicine Department during 2 consecutive months. Clinical, laboratory and imaging data were analyzed. Infection at hospital admission was defined in the presence of either a microbiological isolation or suggestive clinical, laboratory, and/or imaging findings. Use of antibiotics in the 8 days before hospital admission, presence of immunosuppression, hematologic neoplasms, parasite, or fungal infections were exclusion criteria. In case of multiple hospital admissions, only the first admission was considered.Sensitivity and specificity values for eosinophils, leukocytes, neutrophils, and C-reactive protein were determined by receiver operating characteristic curve. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS Statistics® v25 and MedCalc Statistical Software® v19.2.3.ResultsA total of 323 hospitalization episodes were evaluated, each corresponding to a different patient. One hundred fifteen patients were excluded. A total of 208 patients were included, 62.0% (n = 129) of them infected at admission. Ten patients had multiple infections.Infected patients had fewer eosinophils than uninfected patients (15.8 ± 42 vs 71.1 ± 159 cell/mm3; P < .001). An eosinophil count at admission ≤69 cell/mm3 had a sensitivity of 89.1% and specificity of 54.4% (area under the curve 0.752; 95% confidence interval 0.682-0.822) for the presence of infection. Eosinophil count of >77 cells/mm3 had a negative likelihood ratio of 0.16.ConclusionsEosinophil count was significantly lower in infected than in uninfected patients. The cutoff 69 cells/mm3 was the most accurate in predicting infection. Eosinophil count >77 cells/mm3 was a good predictor of absence of infection.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Short hospital stays may represent opportunities to avert unnecessary admissions or expedite inpatient care. To inform the design of interventions that target patients with potentially avoidable hospital admissions or brief stays, we examined the patient, physician and situational characteristics associated with short stays among patients admitted to general internal medicine wards and describe the use of hospital resources by these patients. METHODS:This was a multicentre cross-sectional study conducted between Apr. 1, 2012, and Mar. 31, 2015, at 5 teaching hospitals in Toronto. We included all general internal medicine admissions through the emergency department. We examined patient, physician and situational predictors of a short hospital stay, which was defined as the patient's being discharged home alive in 2 possible time windows: less than 24 hours, or 72 hours or less. RESULTS:The final study sample included 56 055 admissions and 37 700 unique patients. Patients discharged in less than 24 hours and in 72 hours or less accounted for 4245 (7.6%) and 13 442 (31.6%) admissions, respectively. After we controlled for patient factors, patients of female physicians were less likely than those of male physicians to have stays lasting less than 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.86) or 72 hours or less (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.79-0.86). Patients admitted at night or on a weekday were significantly more likely than those admitted at other times to have stays lasting less than 24 hours (night: adjusted OR 2.73, 95% CI 2.44-3.06; weekday: adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.17-1.36) or 72 hours or less (night: adjusted OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.22-1.37, weekday: adjusted OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.10). Among stays lasting less than 24 hours and 24-72 hours, intravenously administered medications were ordered for 2788 (65.7%) and 10 722 (79.8%) patients, respectively, and computed tomography scans were performed for 1561 (36.8%) and 5354 (39.1%) patients, respectively. INTERPRETATION:Short general internal medicine hospital stays were common and were associated with patient, physician and situational factors. Interventions to avert hospital admission or reduce length of stay may be more effective if they are accessible outside typical working hours and provide access to intravenous therapy and radiological investigations.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of telemedicine has increased dramatically through the COVID-19 pandemic. Although data are available about patient satisfaction with telemedicine, little is known about immigrant patients' experience.ObjectiveWe sought to investigate patients' experiences with telehealth compared to in- person visits between immigrants and nonimmigrants. We wanted to identify and describe next visit preferences within the Farmington University of Connecticut Internal Medicine practice to ultimately guide suggestions for more equitable use and accessibility of visit options.MethodsA total of 270 patients including 122 immigrants and 148 nonimmigrants were seen by 4 Internal Medicine providers in an in-person (n=132) or telemedicine (n=138) university practice setting. Patients were queried between February and April 2021, using an adaptation of a previously validated patient satisfaction survey that contained standard questions developed by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Program. Patients seen via in-person visits completed a paper copy of the survey. The same survey was administered by a follow-up phone call for telemedicine visits. Patients surveyed spoke English, Spanish, or Arabic and were surveyed in their preferred language. For televisits, the same survey was read to the patient by a certified translator. The survey consisted of 10 questions on a Likert scale of 1-5. Of them, 9 questions assessed patient satisfaction under the categories of access to care, interpersonal interaction, and quality of care. An additional question asked patients to describe and explain the reasons behind next visit preferences. Survey question responses were compared by paired t tests.ResultsAcross both immigrant and nonimmigrant patient populations, satisfaction with perceived quality of care was high, regardless of visit type (P=.80, P=.60 for televisits and P=.76, P=.37 for in-person visits). During televisits, immigrants were more likely to feel providers spent sufficient time with them (P<.001). Different perceptions were noted among nonimmigrant patients. Nonimmigrants tended to perceive more provider time during in-person visits (P=.006). When asked to comment on reasons behind next televisit preference, nonimmigrant patients prioritized convenience, whereas immigrants noted not having to navigate office logistics. For those who chose in-person visits, both groups prioritized the need for a physical exam.ConclusionsAlthough satisfaction was high for both telemedicine and in-person visits across immigrant and nonimmigrant populations, significant differences in patient priorities were identified. Immigrants found televisits desirable because they felt they spent more time with providers and were able to avoid additional office logistics that are often challenging barriers for non-English speakers. This suggests opportunities to use information technology to provide cultural and language-appropriate information throughout immigrants' in-person and telemedicine visit experience. A focus on diminishing these barriers will help reduce health care inequities among immigrant patients.

Dataset Information

The learners' perspective on internal medicine ward rounds: a cross-sectional study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The learners' perspective on internal medicine ward rounds: a cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets