Rethinking the consultation paradigm: Validity evidence for a new framework, a multimethods study.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital consultation is essential for patient care. We previously proposed a framework of seven specific consultation types to classify consult requests to improve communication, workflow, and provider satisfaction. METHODS: This multimethods study's aim was to evaluate the applicability of the consult classification framework to real internal medicine (IM) consults. We sought validity evidence using Kane's validity model with focus groups and classifying consult requests from five IM specialties. Participants attended five 1 h semi-structured focus groups that were recorded, transcribed, and coded for thematic saturation. For each specialty, three specialists and three hospitalists categorized 100 (total 500) random anonymized consult requests. The primary outcome was concordance in the classification of consult requests, defined as the sum of partial concordance and perfect concordance, where respectively 4-5/6 and 6/6 participants classified a consult in the same category. We used χ2 tests to compare concordance rates across specialties and between specialists and hospitalists. RESULTS: Five major themes were identified in the qualitative analysis of the focus groups: (1) consult question, (2) interpersonal interactions, (3) value, (4) miscommunication, (5) consult framework application, barriers, and iterative development. In the quantitative analysis, the overall concordance rate was 88.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 85.7-91.4), and perfect concordance was 46.6% (95% CI: 42.2-51.1). Concordance differed significantly between hospitalists and specialists overall (p = .01), with a higher proportion of hospitalists having perfect concordance compared to specialists (67.2% vs. 57.8%, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: The consult classification framework was found to be applicable to consults from five different IM specialties, and could improve communication and education.

Missing Voices: What Early Career Hospitalists View as Essential in Hospital Medicine-Focused Education.

OBJECTIVES: Acknowledging that a successful career in hospital medicine (HM) requires specialized skills, residency programs have developed hospital medicine-focused education (HMFE) programs. Surveys of Internal Medicine residency leaders have described HMFE curricula but are limited to that specialty and lack perspectives from early career hospitalists (ECHs) who recently completed this training. As such, we surveyed multispecialty ECHs to evaluate their preferences for HMFE and to identify gaps in standard residency training and career development that HMFE can bridge. The objectives of our study were to describe multispecialty ECH needs and preferences for HMFE and to identify gaps in standard residency training and career development that HMFE can bridge. METHODS: From February to March 2021, ECHs (defined as hospitalists within 0-5 years from residency) were surveyed using the Society of Hospital Medicine's listserv. Respondents identified as having participated in HMFE or not during residency (defining them as HMFE participants or non-HMFE participants). RESULTS: From 257 respondents, 84 (33%) ECHs met inclusion criteria. Half (n = 42) were HMFE participants. ECHs ranked clinical hospitalist career preparation (86%) and mentorship from HM faculty (85%) as the most important gaps in standard residency training and career development that HMFE can bridge. Other key components of HMFE included exposure to quality improvement, patient safety, and high-value care (67%); provision of autonomy through independent rounding (54%); and preparation for the job application process (70%). CONCLUSIONS: Multispecialty ECHs describe HMFE as positively influencing their decision to pursue a hospitalist career and increasing their preparedness for practice. HMFE may be particularly well suited to foster advanced clinical skills such as independent rounding, critical thinking, and self-reflection. We propose an organizing framework for HMFE in residency that may assist in the implementation and innovation of HMFE programs nationwide and in the development of standardized HMFE competencies.

A Resident-as-Leader Curriculum for Managing Inpatient Teams.

PROBLEM: Leading inpatient teams is a foundational clinical responsibility of resident physicians and leadership is a core competency for inpatient physicians, yet few training programs have formal leadership curricula to realize this clinical skill. INTERVENTION: We implemented a 4-module curriculum for PGY1 internal medicine residents. The program focused on the managerial skills necessary for daily clinical leadership, followed by clinical coaching. Interns were first introduced to foundational concepts and then given the opportunity to apply those concepts to real-world practice followed by clinical coaching. CONTEXT: Using direct-observations and a previously published checklist for rounds leadership, this study sought to evaluate the workplace behavior change for novice residents leading inpatient teams for the first time. We conducted a prospective cohort study (March 2016 and August 2018) of internal medicine residents at a large tertiary academic medical center in Boston, MA. Trained faculty raters performed direct observations of clinical rounding experiences using the checklist and compared the findings to historical and internal controls. Questionnaires were distributed pre- and post- curriculum to assess satisfaction and readiness to lead a team. IMPACT: We trained 65 PGY1 residents and raters conducted 140 direct observations - 36 in the intervention group and 104 among historical controls. The unadjusted mean score in rounds leadership skills for the intervention group was 19.0 (SD = 5.1) compared to 16.2 (SD = 6.2) for historical controls. Adjusting for repeated measures, we found significant improvement in mean scores for behaviors linked to the curricular objectives (p = 0.008) but not for general behaviors not covered by the curriculum (p = 0.2). LESSONS LEARNED: A formal curriculum to train residents as leaders led to behavior change in the workplace in domains essential to rounds leadership. We also found that the curriculum was highly regarded in that all interns indicated they would recommend the curriculum to a peer. Moreover, the program may have assuaged some anxiety during the transition to junior year as 90% of interns surveyed felt more ready to start PGY2 year than historical trainings. We learned that while a robust, multi-faceted modular curriculum and clinical coaching successfully resulted in behavior change, the resources required to manage this program are significant and difficult to sustain. Future iterations could include asynchronous material and potentially peer-observation of rounds leadership to reduce the burden on faculty and program curricular time.

Self-Directed Learning in Medical Education: Training for a Lifetime of Discovery.

Issue: Life-long learning is a skill that is central to competent health professionals, and medical educators have sought to understand how adult professionals learn, adapt to new information, and independently seek to learn more. Accrediting bodies now mandate that training programs teach in ways that promote self-directed learning (SDL) but do not provide adequate guidance on how to address this requirement. Evidence: The model for the SDL mandate in physician training is based mostly on early childhood and secondary education evidence and literature, and may not capture the unique environment of medical training and clinical education. Furthermore, there is uncertainty about how medical schools and postgraduate training programs should implement and evaluate SDL educational interventions. The Shapiro Institute for Education and Research, in conjunction with the Association of American Medical Colleges, convened teams from eight medical schools from North America to address the challenge of defining, implementing, and evaluating SDL and the structures needed to nurture and support its development in health professional training. Implications: In this commentary, the authors describe SDL in Medical Education, (SDL-ME), which is a construct of learning and pedagogy specific to medical students and physicians in training. SDL-ME builds on the foundations of SDL and self-regulated learning theory, but is specifically contextualized for the unique responsibilities of physicians to patients, inter-professional teams, and society. Through consensus, the authors offer suggestions for training programs to teach and evaluate SDL-ME. To teach self-directed learning requires placing the construct in the context of patient care and of an obligation to society at large. The SDL-ME construct builds upon SDL and SRL frameworks and suggests SDL as foundational to health professional identity formation.KEYWORDSself-directed learning; graduate medical education; undergraduate medical education; theoretical frameworksSupplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2021.1938074 .

Cohort study of hospitalists' procedural skills: baseline competence and durability after simulation-based training.

OBJECTIVES: Hospitalists are expected to be competent in performing bedside procedures, which are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A national decline in procedures performed by hospitalists has prompted questions about their procedural competency. Additionally, though simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) has been shown to be effective among trainees whether this approach has enduring benefits for independent practitioners who already have experience is unknown. We aimed to assess the baseline procedural skill of hospitalists already credentialed to perform procedures. We hypothesised that simulation-based training of hospitalists would result in durable skill gains after several months. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with pretraining and post-training measurements. SETTING: Single, large, urban academic medical centre in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two out of 38 eligible participants defined as hospitalists working on teaching services where they would supervise trainees performing procedures. INTERVENTIONS: One-on-one, 60 min SBML of lumbar puncture (LP) and abdominal paracentesis (AP). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was the percentage of hospitalists obtaining minimum passing scores (MPS) on LP and AP checklists; our secondary outcomes were average checklist scores and self-reported confidence. RESULTS: At baseline, only 16% hospitalists met or exceeded the MPS for LP and 32% for AP. Immediately after SBML, 100% of hospitalists reached this threshold. Reassessment an average of 7 months later revealed that only 40% of hospitalists achieved the MPS. Confidence increased initially after training but declined over time. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists may be performing invasive bedside procedures without demonstration of adequate skill. A single evidence-based training intervention was insufficient to sustain skills for the majority of hospitalists over a short period of time. More stringent practices for certifying hospitalists who perform risky procedures are warranted, as well as mechanisms to support skill maintenance, such as periodic simulation-based training and assessment.

Generalists as Clinical Physiologists: Bringing Science Back to the Bedside.

BACKGROUND: Few generalists engage in basic science research or feel comfortable teaching physiology at the bedside. This may reflect a lack of understanding or confidence teaching physiologic principles. AIM: To inspire general internists to relearn and teach physiology in clinical practice. SETTING: An active biomedical research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: We educated 67 faculty participants (4 primary care, 59 hospitalists, and 4 other specialties) from 24 medical centers, representing 17 states. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The 5-day course was structured around re-learning basic physiology principles and developing teaching skills. Participants engaged in hands-on experiments through 4 modules using aquatic species, each paired with a physiology content primer. Participants also developed teaching scripts based on their experiments. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Post-course surveys revealed that 97% felt confident teaching physiology at the bedside, 100% felt the course enhanced their understanding of the mechanisms of disease, and there was a significant improvement in self-reported teaching ability. DISCUSSION: An immersive, hands-on faculty development course that integrated physiology with clinical decision-making increased participants' comfort level and self-rated ability to teach and incorporate physiology in their clinical work. We believe faculty development is one potential solution to the growing chasm between clinicians and scientists in general medicine.

Things We Do for No Reason™: Card Flipping Rounds.

Inspired by the ABIM Foundation's Choosing Wisely® campaign, the "Things We Do for No Reason™" (TWDFNR) series reviews practices that have become common parts of hospital care but may provide little value to our patients. Practices reviewed in the TWDFNR series do not represent "black and white" conclusions or clinical practice standards but are meant as a starting place for research and active discussions among hospitalists and patients. We invite you to be part of that discussion.

Peer observation to develop resident teaching.

BACKGROUND: Developing teaching skills is a fundamental part of physician postgraduate training. Although resident-as-teacher curricula are proliferating, there is no clear consensus on how best to train resident physicians as clinical teachers. Peer observation has been shown to be effective in other settings, including faculty development, and could be adopted for resident teaching skill development. METHODS: The authors developed a 5-day resident-as-teacher training programme, founded on three principles: (i) focused seminars; (ii) authentic teaching experiences; and (iii) peer observation. To provide genuine teaching experiences, course participants taught regularly scheduled curricular sessions. Residents were partnered with a peer; each delivered two teaching sessions and provided two peer observations. RESULTS: Evaluations revealed the course had a 'major impact' on participants' teaching. Significant improvements were observed in self-reported comfort and confidence with teaching and in providing feedback. Peer observation was cited as the most effective component of the course. Nearly all residents were both comfortable receiving and providing peer-observed feedback. A majority of residents reported that they were more likely to seek feedback as a result of the course. The faculty member time required was limited to 1-2 hours per individual. DISCUSSION: Peer observation can be used effectively to engage residents and advance clinical teaching skills. Residents were generally comfortable giving and receiving feedback in peer-observer dyads. Employing peer observation also reduced the amount of faculty member time needed to deliver resident-as-teacher programming, thereby facilitating the scalability of the programme. Allowing participants to teach during regular conference time allowed for smooth integration into the pre-existing schedule for the training programme.