"I just stand around and look friendly" - Comparing medical students' and physicians' ward round scripts.

BACKGROUND: Even though ward rounds are important learning opportunities for medical students, unfavourable ward round scripts of students and physicians may hinder learning in such situations. We investigated medical students' and physicians' ward round scripts with respect to (a) the content focus of ward round activities, and (b) the potential of these activities for knowledge construction. METHODS: We conducted standardized interviews with 50 medical students and physicians in internal medicine at different expertise stages. Activities participants labelled as typical for ward rounds were coded with respect to their content focus and their potential with regard to knowledge construction. RESULTS: Regarding content focus, especially residents mainly named activities bound to patient care. Teaching- and learning-related activities were very rare, but more frequently mentioned by students and more experienced physicians. With respect to potential for knowledge construction, students regarded significantly more passive activities (= low potential for knowledge construction) as typical for ward rounds, especially when they described their own role. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students should be supported in their development of conceiving ward rounds as valuable learning opportunities. Residents should be asked to take their teaching responsibility seriously, for example by demanding an active engagement of the students during ward rounds.

Ward round competences in surgery and psychiatry - a comparative multidisciplinary interview study.

BACKGROUND: The ward round is a key element in everyday hospital inpatient care irrespective of the medical speciality. The underperformance in conducting ward rounds of junior clinicians has already been described. Therefore, necessary skills and competences of clinicians need to be defined, taught and delivered for curricular instruction. In addition to published data on ward round competences in internal medicine this study aims to determine the common competences for surgical and psychiatric ward rounds in order to find differences depending on the speciality. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with surgical (N = 30) and psychiatric ward staff (N = 30) of a university hospital and five community hospitals were conducted. Competences necessary for performing ward rounds as well as structural aspects were identified by systematic content analysis and frequency analysis, supported by adequate statistics. RESULTS: Relevant competences for both fields are: collaborative clinical reasoning, communication with the patient and the team, organization, teamwork, management of difficult situations, self-management, error-management, teaching, empathy, nonverbal communication, patient-management and professionalism. Clinical skills were mentioned more often in surgical interviews, while nonverbal communication was described more often in psychiatric interviews. Empathy and communication with the team were more frequently attributed to psychiatric residents. CONCLUSION: The competences which were identified as necessary for conducting a ward round in surgery and psychiatry are similar and correspond to previously reported competences in internal medicine. Clinical skills are of greater importance in surgery than in psychiatry. Concerning empathy and nonverbal communication, further research is needed to determine whether they are of minor importance in surgery or whether there is a lack of awareness of these competences.

Ward rounds in internal medicine: Validation of an Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) observation checklist.

Objectives: Ward rounds serve a crucial daily activity in hospitals. Building on the Entrustable Professional Activity "Conducting internal medicine ward rounds" consisting of ten competencies and 25 corresponding activities, this study aims at assessing content and external validity of an observation checklist for this EPA. Methods: A focus group aimed at content validation of the checklist. Five participants therefore evaluated it with respect to comprehensiveness and comprehensibility. To investigate external validity, 14 authentic ward rounds were video-taped and rated by two raters with the adapted observation checklist in terms of the appearance of certain activities in the videos. Results: After some adaptions, participants of the focus group agreed on a checklist consisting of nine competencies, 25 activities and 110 examples of observable behaviours supporting content validity. External validity was studied by using the observation checklist for ratings of ward round videos. The checklist was regarded as a valuable tool to structure observation. Along with the high frequencies of observed behaviour and interrater-reliability, external validity can be assumed. Conclusion: The first scientifically developed comprehensive observation checklist for the EPA conducting a ward round in internal medicine is presented. The checklist is a valuable tool for providing elaborated feedback in undergraduate and graduate medical education. Focussing on multi-institutional validation and the cut offs of the checklist to determine the levels of entrustment are recommended for future research.