Randomized Study of Bedside vs Hallway Rounding: Neurology Rounding Study

Over the last century, attending rounds have shifted away from the bedside. Despite evidence for greater patient satisfaction rates and improved nursing perception of teamwork with bedside presentations, residents and attending physicians are apprehensive of the bedside approach. There is lack of data to guide rounding practices within neurology, and therefore optimal rounding methods remain unclear. The objective of this study was to compare bedside rounding with hallway rounding on an academic neurology inpatient service and assess efficiency, trainee education, and satisfaction among patients and staff.We conducted a single-center prospective randomized study of bedside versus hallway rounding on new inpatient neurology admissions over one-week blocks. The bedside team presented patients at the bedside, while the hallway team presented patients outside of the patient’s room. We evaluated the two approaches with time-motion analysis, which investigated the rounding style’s effect on composition and timing of rounds (primary outcome), and surveys of patients, nurses, residents, and attending physicians on both teams (secondary outcomes).The mean rounding time per newly admitted patient in the bedside group (n = 38 patients) and hallway group (n = 41 patients) was 23 minutes and 23.2 minutes, respectively (p = 0.93). The bedside group spent on average 56.4% of patient rounding time in the patient’s room, while the hallway group spent 39.5% of rounding time in the patient’s room (p = 0.036). Residents perceived hallway rounding to be more efficient and associated it with a superior educational experience and more effective data review. Nurses had improved perception of their participation in bedside rounds. Though patients’ views of bedside and hallway rounds were similar, patients who had experienced bedside rounds preferred it.In conclusion, bedside rounding was perceived less favorably by most residents but was as efficient as hallway rounding. Although bedside rounding limited the use of technology for data review, it promoted nursing participation and resulted in more time spent with the patient.

Interruptions to Attending Physician Rounds and Their Effect on Resident Education

ABSTRACT Background Daily attending rounds (AR) are a cornerstone of teaching and patient care in academic health centers. Interruptions in health care are common and can cause increased risk of errors, incomplete work, and decreased decision-making accuracy. Interruptions to AR may diminish a trainee's capacity to learn and retain information. Objective We characterized and quantified interruptions that occur during AR. Methods We used a mixed-methods design combining a prospective observational study with a qualitative study. AR were observed January to March 2020 to characterize interruptions, followed by semi-structured interviews with the observed physicians to elucidate the effect of interruptions on workflow and the educational value of rounds. Results There were 378 observed interruptions over the course of 30 AR sessions, averaging 12.6 (range 1–22, median 13) interruptions per rounding session. Bedside nursing staff was the most common source of interruptions (25%) and consultant recommendations was the most common topic of interruption (21%). Most interruptions occurred during patient presentations (76%), and the most common method of interaction was text message (24%). Most team members described negative effects of interruptions, including loss of focus and missing critical clinical information; some also reported that certain interruptions had positive effects on education and clinical care. Interns were more likely to report negative emotional reactions to interruptions. Conclusions AR are frequently interrupted for non-urgent topics by a variety of methods and sources. Negative effects included loss of focus, missed information, and increased stress. Proactive communication, particularly between physicians and nurses, was suggested to reduce interruptions.

Nephrology Fellows’ and Program Directors’ Perceptions of Hospital Rounds in the United States

Background and objectivesHospital rounds are a traditional vehicle for patient-care delivery and experiential learning for trainees. We aimed to characterize practices and perceptions of rounds in United States nephrology training programs.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe conducted a national survey of United States nephrology fellows and program directors. Fellows received the survey after completing the 2019 National Board of Medical Examiners Nephrology In-Training Exam. Program directors received the survey at the American Society of Nephrology’s 2019 Nephrology Training Program Directors’ Retreat. Surveys assessed the structure and perceptions of rounds, focusing on workload, workflow, value for patient care, and fellows’ clinical skill-building. Directors were queried about their expectations for fellow prerounds and efficiency of rounds. Responses were quantified by proportions.ResultsFellow and program director response rates were 73% (n=621) and 70% (n=55). Most fellows (74%) report a patient census of >15, arrive at the hospital before 7:00 am (59%), and complete progress notes after 5:00 pm (46%). Among several rounding activities, fellows most valued bedside discussions for building their clinical skills (34%), but only 30% examine all patients with the attending at the bedside. Most directors (71%) expect fellows to both examine patients and collect data before attending-rounds. A majority (78%) of directors commonly complete their documentation after 5:00 pm, and for 36%, after 8:00 pm. Like fellows, directors most value bedside discussion for development of fellows’ clinical skills (44%). Lack of preparedness for the rigors of nephrology fellowship was the most-cited barrier to efficient rounds (31%).ConclusionsHospital rounds in United States nephrology training programs are characterized by high patient volumes, early-morning starts, and late-evening clinical documentation. Fellows use a variety of prerounding styles and examine patients at the beside with their attendings at different frequencies.PodcastThis article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2020_03_17_CJN.10190819.mp3

Evaluating the impact of clinical librarians on clinical questions during inpatient rounds

Objective: The investigation sought to determine the effects of a clinical librarian (CL) on inpatient team clinical questioning quality and quantity, learner self-reported literature searching skills, and use of evidence-based medicine (EBM).Methods: Clinical questioning was observed over 50 days of inpatient pediatric and internal medicine attending rounds. A CL was present for 25 days and absent for 25 days. Questioning was compared between groups. Question quality was assessed by a blinded evaluator, who used a rubric adapted from the Fresno Test of Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine. Team members were surveyed to assess perceived impacts of the CL on rounds.Results: Rounds with a CL (CLR) were associated with significantly increased median number of questions asked (5 questions CLR vs. 3 NCLR; p<0.01) and answered (3 CLR vs. 2 NCLR; p<0.01) compared to rounds without a CL (NCLR). CLR were also associated with increased mean time spent asking (1.39 minutes CLR vs. 0.52 NCLR; p<0.01) and answering (2.15 minutes CLR vs. 1.05 NCLR; p=0.02) questions. Rounding time per patient was not significantly different between CLR and NCLR. Questions during CLR were 2 times higher in adapted Fresno Test quality than during NCLR (p<0.01). Select participants described how the CL’s presence improved their EBM skills and care decisions.Conclusions: Inpatient CLR were associated with more and improved clinical questioning and subjectively perceived to improve clinicians’ EBM skills. CLs may directly affect patient care; further study is required to assess this. CLs on inpatient rounds may be an effective means for clinicians to learn and use EBM skills.

Roles of Infectious Diseases Consultant Pharmacists and Antimicrobial Stewardship Pharmacists: A Survey of Canadian Tertiary Care Academic Hospitals

<p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p><strong>Background:</strong> Infectious diseases consultant (IDC) pharmacists work within an IDC service to care for inpatients with complex infections. With Accreditation Canada’s new Required Organizational Practice promoting the establishment of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs, AMS pharmacists are being employed in acute care hospitals. There is potential for overlap in responsibilities between IDC and AMS pharmacists, but there is no literature outlining the current duties for each group in Canada.</p><p><strong>Objective:</strong> To describe the demographic characteristics and roles of IDC and AMS pharmacists in Canadian tertiary care academic hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> A survey of IDC and AMS pharmacists at Canadian tertiary care academic hospitals was conducted between February and April 2015. The questionnaire included questions about the pharmacist’s experience, education, and training; the institution where the pharmacist was practising; the IDC or AMS team characteristics; and the pharmacist’s roles in clinical, educational, administrative, and research sectors.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> The survey response rate was 77% (68/88). The 68 respondents self-identified as IDC pharmacists (14 [21%]), AMS pharmacists (34 [50%]), or dual-role IDC and AMS pharmacists (20 [29%]). Compared with AMS pharmacists, IDC pharmacists reported more of the following unique clinical activities: directly communicating with patients, attending rounds, involving patients in decision-making, and providing patient education. The 3 groups of pharmacists described similar educational responsibilities. The AMS pharmacists performed more of the following administrative and research duties: development of antibiograms and preprinted orders, collection of antimicrobial metrics, and drug-use evaluations for antimicrobials. Dual-role IDC and AMS pharmacists were involved in fewer of the unique activities described by those who practised within a single subspecialty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Self-identified IDC and AMS pharmacists in Canadian tertiary care academic hospitals were performing many similar roles; however, distinct differences within the clinical, administrative, and research domains were identified among IDC pharmacists, AMS pharmacists, and those who identified as dual-role IDC and AMS pharmacists.</p><p><strong>RÉSUMÉ</strong></p><p><strong>Contexte :</strong> Les pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses travaillent au sein d’un service de consultants en maladies infectieuses afin de prodiguer des soins aux patients hospitalisés atteints d’infections complexes. Or, en raison de la nouvelle Pratique organisationnelle requise d’Agrément Canada qui encourage la mise en oeuvre de programmes de gérance des antimicrobiens, des pharmaciens sont affectés à cette fonction dans les hôpitaux de soins de courte durée. On distingue un possible chevauchement des responsabilités entre les pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses et ceux chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens, mais il n’y a aucun document qui définit les responsabilités actuelles pour chacun de ces groupes au Canada.</p><p><strong>Objectif :</strong> Décrire les caractéristiques démographiques et les rôles des pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses et de ceux chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens dans les hôpitaux universitaires de soins tertiaires au Canada.</p><p><strong>Méthodes :</strong> Entre février et avril 2015, on a mené un sondage auprès des pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses et de ceux chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens travaillant dans les hôpitaux universitaires de soins tertiaires au Canada. Les questions portaient, entre autres, sur l’expérience du pharmacien, ses études et sa formation, l’établissement où il travaillait, les caractéristiques des équipes de consultants en maladies infectieuses et de gérance des antimicrobiens ainsi que sur ses rôles dans les secteurs cliniques et administratifs et dans les secteurs de la formation et de la recherche.</p><p><strong>Résultats :</strong> Le taux de réponse au sondage était de 77 % (68/88). Les 68 répondants s’identifiaient comme des pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses (14 [21 %]), des pharmaciens chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens (34 [50 %]) ou des pharmaciens occupant les deux rôles (20 [29 %]). Comparativement à leur collègues chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens, les pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses ont davantage indiqué accomplir les activités cliniques uniques suivantes : communiquer directement avec les patients, participer aux tournées médicales, amener les patients à participer aux prises de décisions et offrir des conseils aux patients. Les trois groupes de pharmaciens ont évoqué des responsabilités éducatives similaires. Les pharmaciens chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens accomplissaient davantage les tâches administratives et de recherche suivantes : élaboration d’antibiogrammes et d’ordonnances préimprimées, cueillette de mesures sur les antimicrobiens<br />et évaluation de l’utilisation des antimicrobiens. Les pharmaciens qui cumulaient les deux rôles participaient à un moins grand nombre des activités uniques décrites par ceux qui exerçaient une seule sous-spécialité.</p><p><strong>Conclusions :</strong> Les pharmaciens des hôpitaux universitaires de soins tertiaires au Canada qui s’identifiaient eux-mêmes comme des pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses ou des pharmaciens chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens exécutaient bon nombre de tâches similaires. Cependant, des différences marquées en ce qui touche aux domaines clinique et administratif et à celui de la recherche ont été repérées entre les pharmaciens consultants en maladies infectieuses, ceux chargés de la gérance des antimicrobiens et ceux occupant les deux rôles.</p>

Rounds Today: A Qualitative Study of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics Resident Perceptions

ABSTRACT Background Attending rounds is a key component of patient care and education at teaching hospitals, yet there is an absence of studies addressing trainees' perceptions of rounds. Objective To determine perceptions of pediatrics and internal medicine residents about the current and ideal purposes of inpatient rounds on hospitalist services. Methods In this multi-institutional qualitative study, the authors conducted focus groups with a purposive sample of internal medicine and pediatrics residents at 4 teaching hospitals. The constant comparative method was used to identify themes and codes. Results The study identified 4 themes: patient care, clinical education, patient/family involvement, and evaluation. Patient care included references to activities on rounds that forwarded care of the patient. Clinical education pertained to teaching/learning on rounds. Patient/family involvement encompassed comments about incorporating patients and families on rounds. Evaluation described residents demonstrating skill for attendings. Conclusions Resident perceptions of the purposes of rounds aligned with rounding activities described by prior observational studies of rounds. The influence of time pressures and the divergent needs of participants on today's rounds placed these identified purposes in tension, and led to resident dissatisfaction in the achievement of all of them. Suboptimal congruency exists between perceived resident clinical education and specialty-specific milestones. These findings suggest a need for education of multiple stakeholders by (1) enhancing faculty teaching strategies to maximize clinical education while minimizing inefficiencies; (2) informing residents about the value of patient interactions and family-centered rounds; and (3) educating program directors in proper alignment of inpatient rotational objectives to the milestones.