Resident Perspectives Regarding Education on Attending Rounds.

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development Pub Date : 2025-03-03 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23821205251324019
Ian J Larson, Alana R Siev, Cristina M Gonzalez
{"title":"Resident Perspectives Regarding Education on Attending Rounds.","authors":"Ian J Larson, Alana R Siev, Cristina M Gonzalez","doi":"10.1177/23821205251324019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>An important component of internal medicine resident education is morning (attending) rounds. Effective aspects of medical education include involving all team members, minimizing distractions, asking questions, and having ready access to data, all of which may not be present during rounds. There is limited information on learner-centered rounds or resident perspectives about education during rounds. To inform a learner-centered approach to rounds, the investigators conducted a focus group study of Internal Medicine residents exploring their perceived strengths and weaknesses of rounds, and how rounds could be better used as a teaching tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three 60-min focus groups were conducted with N = 21 postgraduate year 2/3 Internal Medicine Residents at Montefiore Medical Center in Bronx, NY, USA in 2021-2022. Two resident investigators led the focus groups using a semistructured interview guide. Questions included defining types of rounds, benefits and pitfalls of various rounding styles, their impact on resident education, and recommendations to improve education on morning rounds. The sessions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and de-identified. Transcripts were analyzed through inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Rounding styles identified were bedside, table rounds, and a hybrid approach. Three themes emerged through analysis of the data: (1) A hybrid model offers an optimal balance of education; (2) full bedside rounds have unintended pitfalls; and (3) Attending preparation affects the quality of rounds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Residents' perceptions of the education on attending rounds are impacted by both attending rounding style and advanced preparation. Our participants' insights could inform a rounding approach that optimizes both patient- and learner-centeredness.</p>","PeriodicalId":45121,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","volume":"12 ","pages":"23821205251324019"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877459/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205251324019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: An important component of internal medicine resident education is morning (attending) rounds. Effective aspects of medical education include involving all team members, minimizing distractions, asking questions, and having ready access to data, all of which may not be present during rounds. There is limited information on learner-centered rounds or resident perspectives about education during rounds. To inform a learner-centered approach to rounds, the investigators conducted a focus group study of Internal Medicine residents exploring their perceived strengths and weaknesses of rounds, and how rounds could be better used as a teaching tool.

Methods: Three 60-min focus groups were conducted with N = 21 postgraduate year 2/3 Internal Medicine Residents at Montefiore Medical Center in Bronx, NY, USA in 2021-2022. Two resident investigators led the focus groups using a semistructured interview guide. Questions included defining types of rounds, benefits and pitfalls of various rounding styles, their impact on resident education, and recommendations to improve education on morning rounds. The sessions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and de-identified. Transcripts were analyzed through inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Rounding styles identified were bedside, table rounds, and a hybrid approach. Three themes emerged through analysis of the data: (1) A hybrid model offers an optimal balance of education; (2) full bedside rounds have unintended pitfalls; and (3) Attending preparation affects the quality of rounds.

Conclusions: Residents' perceptions of the education on attending rounds are impacted by both attending rounding style and advanced preparation. Our participants' insights could inform a rounding approach that optimizes both patient- and learner-centeredness.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Landscape Analysis of Emergency Medicine Residency Education on Domestic Violence. Resident Perspectives Regarding Education on Attending Rounds. The Creation of Shared Mental Models in Simulation Training Enhances Quality of Resuscitation: A Randomized Controlled Study. Advances in Developing Medical Students' 'Web-side Manner'. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Case-Based Learning Aimed at Improving Undergraduate Medical Students' Satisfaction, Attitude, Knowledge, and Skills in the Anatomy Course: An Interventional Study.
×
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