Effect of Bedside vs. Non-bedside Patient Case Presentation During Ward Rounds: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Exploring Ward Team Handoffs of Overnight Admissions: Key Lessons from Field Observations

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic process is a dynamic, team-based activity that is an important aspect of ward rounds in teaching hospitals. However, few studies have examined how academic ward teams operate in areas such as diagnosis in the handoff of overnight admissions during ward rounds. This study draws key lessons from team interactions in the handoff process during ward rounds.

OBJECTIVE

To describe how ward teams operate in the handoff of patients admitted overnight during ward rounds, and to characterize the role of the bedside patient evaluation in this context.

DESIGN

A qualitative ethnographic approach using field observations and documentary analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Attending physicians, medical residents, and medical students on general medicine services in a single teaching hospital.

APPROACH

Thirty-five hours of observations were undertaken over a 4-month period. We purposively approached a diverse group of attendings who cover a range of clinical teaching experience, and obtained informed consent from all ward team members and observed patients. Thirty patient handoffs were observed across 5 ward teams with 45 team members. We conducted thematic analysis of researcher field notes and electronic health record documents using social cognitive theories to characterize the dynamic interactions occurring in the real clinical environment.

KEY RESULTS

Teams spent less time during ward rounds on verifying history and physical examination findings, performing bedside evaluations, and discussing differential diagnoses than other aspects (e.g., reviewing patient data in conference rooms) in the team handoff process of overnight admissions. Several team-based approaches to diagnosis and bedside patient evaluations were observed, including debriefing for learning and decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights potential strengths and missed opportunities for teaching, learning, and engaging directly with patients in the ward team handoff of patients admitted overnight. These findings may inform curriculum development, faculty training, and patient safety research.

Barriers in Healthcare for Latinx Patients with Limited English Proficiency-a Narrative Review

Latinx (includes Hispanics and is the non-gendered term for Latino/Latina which is a person of Latin American origin or descent) constitutes the largest racial and ethnic minority group in the United States (US). Many members of this group report limited English proficiency, experience discrimination, feel distrust in the healthcare setting, and face poorer health outcomes than non-Latinx Whites. As healthcare systems assess internal structures of care, understanding the experiences of Latinx patients may inform strategies to improve care. This narrative review describes studies that assessed the experiences of Latinx patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the inpatient and outpatient settings in the US. We searched PubMed for studies published between January 1, 1990, and March 2021. We reviewed all citations and available abstracts (n = 429). We classified study titles (n = 156) as warranting detailed consideration of the original article. Limited English proficiency is a well-documented challenge reported by Latinx patients seeking care in the outpatient setting, resulting in mistrust of healthcare organizations and clinicians. The effects of LEP overlap substantially with challenges related to patients' immigration status, cultural traditions, and socioeconomic needs. Use of professional interpretation rather than ad hoc interpretation improves trust and satisfaction. There is no consensus about the most effective mode of delivering professional interpretation (in person, telephonic, video conferencing), although rapid simultaneous telephone translation is a promising modality. Increasing awareness of the barriers to effective communication, improving skills in communicating through translators, and increasing the amount of time spent with patients may improve communication and trust more than structural changes like mode of translation or bedside rounding. Cultural fluency training, standardized language training for providers, and incentive pay for fluency are also deserving of further consideration.

Presenting cases in front of patients: implications for a key medical education genre

Case presentations have been researched as both an important form of intra/inter-professional communication, where a patient's clinical information is shared among health professionals involved in their care, and an equally key discursive tool in education, where learners independently assess a patient and present the case to their preceptor and/or care team. But what happens to the case presentation, a genre that governs physician (and learner) talk about patients, when it is used in patients' presence? While they were commonly used at the bedside in the past, case presentations today are more commonly performed in hallways or conference rooms, out of patient earshot. This paper draws on interview data from a study involving patient-present case presentations in a medical education setting. Our analysis asks what participants' metageneric comments about the encounter can teach us about the genre, about patient involvement in medical education, and about linguistic adaptations to the genre that the profession might make to support patient involvement.

The Effect of Bedside Rounds on Learning Outcomes in Medical Education: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To determine if bedside rounds, compared with other forms of hospital ward rounds, improve learning outcomes in medical education.

METHOD

For this systematic review, the authors searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from inception through February 20, 2020. Experimental studies were included if they (1) compared bedside rounds to any other form of rounds in a hospital-based setting, and (2) reported a quantitative comparison of a learning outcome (e.g., learner reaction, knowledge, skills, behavior, health care delivery) among physicians-in-training (medical students, residents, fellows). Extraction elements were summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis of design, implementation, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized trials. All studies involved resident physicians, and 11 also involved medical students. The design and implementation of bedside rounds varied widely, with most studies (n = 13) involving cointerventions (e.g., staff education, real-time order entry).Of the 15 studies that reported learner satisfaction, 7 favored bedside rounds, 4 favored the control, and 4 were equivocal. Of the 4 studies reporting an outcome of learners' knowledge and skills, 2 favored bedside rounds and 2 were equivocal. Of the 8 studies that reported on learner behavior (e.g., bedside communication with patients), 5 favored bedside rounds, 1 favored the control, and 2 were equivocal. Finally, of the 14 studies that reported a health care delivery outcome (e.g., teamwork, rounding time), 8 favored bedside rounds and 6 were equivocal. Due to the high risk of bias and unexplained heterogeneity across studies, the overall strength of evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

In hospital-based settings, learners' satisfaction with bedside rounds is mixed. However, bedside rounds appear to have a positive effect on learner behavior and health care delivery. Given their potential value, additional research is needed to identify barriers to and facilitators of educationally successful bedside rounds.

Effect of Bedside Compared With Outside the Room Patient Case Presentation on Patients' Knowledge About Their Medical Care : A Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Trial

BACKGROUND

Although bedside case presentation contributes to patient-centered care through active patient participation in medical discussions, the complexity of medical information and jargon-induced confusion may cause misunderstandings and patient discomfort.

OBJECTIVE

To compare bedside versus outside the room patient case presentation regarding patients' knowledge about their medical care.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03210987).

SETTING

3 Swiss teaching hospitals.

PATIENTS

Adult medical patients who were hospitalized.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned to bedside or outside the room case presentation.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary endpoint was patients' average knowledge of 3 dimensions of their medical care (each rated on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100): understanding their disease, the therapeutic approach being used, and further plans for care.

RESULTS

Compared with patients in the outside the room group (n = 443), those in the bedside presentation group (n = 476) reported similar knowledge about their medical care (mean, 79.5 points [SD, 21.6] vs. 79.4 points [SD, 19.8]; adjusted difference, 0.09 points [95% CI, -2.58 to 2.76 points]; P = 0.95). Also, an objective rating of patient knowledge by the study team was similar for the 2 groups, but the bedside presentation group had higher ratings of confusion about medical jargon and uncertainty caused by team discussions. Bedside ward rounds were more efficient (mean, 11.89 minutes per patient [SD, 4.92] vs. 14.14 minutes per patient [SD, 5.65]; adjusted difference, -2.31 minutes [CI, -2.98 to -1.63 minutes]; P < 0.001).

LIMITATION

Only Swiss hospitals and medical patients were included.

CONCLUSION

Compared with outside the room case presentation, bedside case presentation was shorter and resulted in similar patient knowledge, but sensitive topics were more often avoided and patient confusion was higher. Physicians presenting at the bedside need to be skilled in the use of medical language to avoid confusion and misunderstandings.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Swiss National Foundation (10531C_ 182422).

Teaching on Rounds and in Small Groups

Bedside teaching plays a vital role the training future physicians, allowing for instruction in history taking, physical examination skills, differential diagnosis development, professionalism, teamwork integration, effective communication, and discussions of medical ethics. Due to changes in the health care system, accreditation bodies, and shortened admittance of patients, rates of bedside teaching have declined. Attending surgeons feel increased external pressures to meet performance metrics while resident physicians adhere to duty hour restrictions. This article highlights popular methods, including bedside rounds, near-peer teaching, and resident versus attending preceptors, and discusses how teaching on rounds has an impact on patients.

Relationships Between Time-at-Bedside During Hospital Ward Rounds, Clinician-Patient Agreement, and Patient Experience

Hospital medicine ward rounds are often conducted away from patients' bedsides, but it is unknown if more time-at-bedside is associated with improved patient outcomes. Our objective is to measure the association between "time-at-bedside," patient experience, and patient-clinician care agreement during ward rounds. Research assistants directly observed medicine services to quantify the amount of time spent discussing each patient's care inside versus outside the patient's room. "Time-at-bedside" was defined as the proportion of time spent discussing a patient's care in his or her room. Patient experience and patient-clinician care agreement both were measured immediately after ward rounds. Results demonstrated that the majority of patient and physicians completely agreement on planned tests (66.3%), planned procedures (79.7%), medication changes (50.6%), and discharge location (66.9%), but had no agreement on the patient's main concern (74.4%) and discharge date (50.6%). Time-at-bedside was not correlated with care agreement or patient experience (P > .05 for all comparisons). This study demonstrates that spending more time at the bedside during ward rounds, alone, is insufficient to improve patient experience.

Impact of Fellows-as-Teachers Workshops on Teaching Rounds: An Observational Study in an ICU

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

During training, fellows serve as teachers and role models for junior colleagues. Fellows-as-teachers curricula may support these roles, but little is known about their effectiveness and durability. We sought to measure the long-term effects on ICU rounds after administering fellows-as-teachers workshops.

Using Bedside Rounds to Change Culture

Although not suitable for every patient encounter, rounding at the beside provides an opportunity to teach and augment the attitudes essential for optimal medical care. It also provides an opportunity to establish and grow the team's culture as well as the culture for each patient encounter. Finally, it provides the attending physician with an opportunity to assess learners' position on the supervision-to-autonomy spectrum, thereby ensuring appropriate supervision while enabling the autonomy necessary for optimal learner growth.