Education Research: The Inappropriate Consult

Charles Sanky, Caroline Gentile, Jennifer Ren, Eric M Bortnick, S. Krieger
{"title":"Education Research: The Inappropriate Consult","authors":"Charles Sanky, Caroline Gentile, Jennifer Ren, Eric M Bortnick, S. Krieger","doi":"10.1212/ne9.0000000000200044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As resident physicians specialize, they lose familiarity with knowledge central to other fields. This can yield what we term the dual fallacies: (1) the sense that their own expertise is common knowledge, and (2) unfamiliar clinical situations seem beyond their scope. In graduate medical education, these dual fallacies may engender the perception of inappropriate consults among specialties. This project evaluated biases in residents' perceptions of expected knowledge and inappropriate consults to improve interdisciplinary education among neurology residents (neurologists) and internal medicine residents (internists). Secondarily, we evaluated whether these biases were mitigated after implementing an educational intervention.Resident neurologists and internists at a large, urban, academic medical center answered board-style questions reflecting neurology and medicine consultation scenarios. They then rated the extent to which each scenario reflected common knowledge to both specialties and whether a consult was warranted. After revising the internal medicine residency curriculum to include a neurology rotation, another cohort of residents was surveyed and participated in semistructured interviews. Paired samplettests and qualitative data analysis were performed.Neurologists and internists participated in phase 1 (n = 23) and phase 2 (n = 42) of the study. Residents from both fields answered more questions correctly from their own specialty than the other in phase 1 (p< 0.05) and phase 2 (p< 0.001). Neurologists and internists in both cohorts thought that each other should know more neurology answers than they actually did (p< 0.05). Neurologists were less likely to agree than internists that medicine questions deserved a consult (p= 0.014). Interviews revealed themes regarding perceived consult appropriateness, affected by educational, communication, clinical, and administrative factors. In addition, residents agreed that appropriate consults must pose a specific question and occur only after an initial investigation was performed, but that this rarely happens.Our findings support that discordant expectations of expertise contribute to a perception of inappropriate consults among neurologists. Nonclinical factors, from cognitive biases to contextual considerations, inform clinical consultation and interdisciplinary patient care. Implementing rotations on other services alone is insufficient to eradicate discordant expectations; however, we propose additional interventions that may prove valuable in medical education.","PeriodicalId":273801,"journal":{"name":"Neurology: Education","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology: Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/ne9.0000000000200044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

As resident physicians specialize, they lose familiarity with knowledge central to other fields. This can yield what we term the dual fallacies: (1) the sense that their own expertise is common knowledge, and (2) unfamiliar clinical situations seem beyond their scope. In graduate medical education, these dual fallacies may engender the perception of inappropriate consults among specialties. This project evaluated biases in residents' perceptions of expected knowledge and inappropriate consults to improve interdisciplinary education among neurology residents (neurologists) and internal medicine residents (internists). Secondarily, we evaluated whether these biases were mitigated after implementing an educational intervention.Resident neurologists and internists at a large, urban, academic medical center answered board-style questions reflecting neurology and medicine consultation scenarios. They then rated the extent to which each scenario reflected common knowledge to both specialties and whether a consult was warranted. After revising the internal medicine residency curriculum to include a neurology rotation, another cohort of residents was surveyed and participated in semistructured interviews. Paired samplettests and qualitative data analysis were performed.Neurologists and internists participated in phase 1 (n = 23) and phase 2 (n = 42) of the study. Residents from both fields answered more questions correctly from their own specialty than the other in phase 1 (p< 0.05) and phase 2 (p< 0.001). Neurologists and internists in both cohorts thought that each other should know more neurology answers than they actually did (p< 0.05). Neurologists were less likely to agree than internists that medicine questions deserved a consult (p= 0.014). Interviews revealed themes regarding perceived consult appropriateness, affected by educational, communication, clinical, and administrative factors. In addition, residents agreed that appropriate consults must pose a specific question and occur only after an initial investigation was performed, but that this rarely happens.Our findings support that discordant expectations of expertise contribute to a perception of inappropriate consults among neurologists. Nonclinical factors, from cognitive biases to contextual considerations, inform clinical consultation and interdisciplinary patient care. Implementing rotations on other services alone is insufficient to eradicate discordant expectations; however, we propose additional interventions that may prove valuable in medical education.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育研究:不当咨询
作为住院医师的专业,他们失去了对其他领域核心知识的熟悉。这可能产生我们所说的双重谬误:(1)他们自己的专业知识是常识的感觉,(2)不熟悉的临床情况似乎超出了他们的范围。在研究生医学教育中,这些双重谬误可能会导致专业之间不适当的咨询。本项目评估住院医师对预期知识的认知偏差和不适当的咨询,以改善神经内科住院医师(神经科医师)和内科住院医师(内科医师)之间的跨学科教育。其次,我们评估了在实施教育干预后这些偏差是否得到缓解。一家大型城市学术医疗中心的住院神经科医生和内科医生回答了反映神经病学和医学咨询场景的董事会式问题。然后,他们对每个场景在多大程度上反映了两个专业的共同知识以及是否有必要进行咨询进行评估。在修改内科住院医师课程以包括神经病学轮转后,对另一组住院医师进行了调查并参加了半结构化访谈。进行配对样本检验和定性数据分析。神经科医生和内科医生参加了第一阶段(n = 23)和第二阶段(n = 42)的研究。在第1阶段(p< 0.05)和第2阶段(p< 0.001),两个领域的住院医生都正确回答了自己专业的问题。两组的神经科医生和内科医生都认为彼此应该比实际知道更多的神经病学答案(p< 0.05)。与内科医生相比,神经科医生不太可能同意医学问题值得咨询(p= 0.014)。访谈揭示了关于感知咨询适当性的主题,受教育、沟通、临床和行政因素的影响。此外,居民们一致认为,适当的咨询必须提出一个具体的问题,并且只有在进行了初步调查之后才会进行,但这种情况很少发生。我们的研究结果支持,对专业知识的不一致期望有助于神经科医生对不适当咨询的看法。非临床因素,从认知偏差到环境考虑,为临床咨询和跨学科患者护理提供信息。仅对其他服务实施轮调不足以消除不一致的期望;然而,我们提出了可能在医学教育中证明有价值的其他干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Addressing Gaps in Competency-Based Medical Education in EEG Instruction, Virtual Learning, and High-Quality Peer Review in Medical Education Curriculum Innovation: Design and Implementation of Synchronous and Asynchronous Curricula to Enhance Residents' EEG Knowledge and Experience The Neuromuscular Portal and Match Curriculum Innovations: A Comprehensive Teleneurology Curriculum for Neurology Trainees Curriculum Innovations: A Social Media–Based Educational Curriculum Improves Knowledge for Trainees in Neurocritical Care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1