The return of bedside rounds: An educational intervention

Jed D. Gonzalo, Cynthia H. Chuang, Grace Huang, Christopher Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Bedside rounds have decreased in frequency on teaching services. Perceived barriers toward bedside rounds are inefficiency and patient and house staff lack of preference for this mode of rounding. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a bedside rounding intervention on the frequency of bedside rounding, duration of patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and resident attitudes toward bedside rounds. Design: A pre- and postintervention design, with a bedside rounding workshop midway through two consecutive internal medicine rotations, with daily resident interviews, patient surveys, and an end-of-the-year survey given to all Medicine house staff. Participants: Medicine house staff and medicine patients. Measures: Frequency of bedside rounds, duration of new patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and house staff attitudes regarding bedside rounds. Results: Forty-four residents completed the bedside rounding workshop. Comparing the preintervention and postintervention phases, bedside rounds increased from <1% to 41% (p<0.001). The average duration of walk rounding encounters was 16 min, and average duration of bedside rounding encounters was 15 min (p=0.42). Duration of rounds was 95 and 98 min, respectively (p=0.52). Patients receiving bedside rounds preferred bedside rounds (99% vs. 83%, p=0.03) and perceived more time spent at the bedside by their team (p<0.001). One hundred twelve house staff (71%) responded, with 73% reporting that bedside rounds are better for patient care. House staff performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe that bedside rounds were more educational (53% vs. 78%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Bedside rounding increased after an educational intervention, and the time to complete bedside rounding encounters was similar to alternative forms of rounding. Patients preferred bedside rounds and perceived more time spent at the bedside when receiving bedside rounds. Medicine residents performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe bedside rounds were more educational, but all house staff valued the importance of bedside rounding for the delivery of patient care.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)792-798
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of general internal medicine
Volume25
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2010

Fingerprint

Internship and Residency
Medicine
Patient Care
Attitude of Health Personnel
Education
Internal Medicine
Teaching
Interviews

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

@article{f4de7c00be7941d2b4f422d93dc0f981,
title = "The return of bedside rounds: An educational intervention",
abstract = "Background: Bedside rounds have decreased in frequency on teaching services. Perceived barriers toward bedside rounds are inefficiency and patient and house staff lack of preference for this mode of rounding. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a bedside rounding intervention on the frequency of bedside rounding, duration of patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and resident attitudes toward bedside rounds. Design: A pre- and postintervention design, with a bedside rounding workshop midway through two consecutive internal medicine rotations, with daily resident interviews, patient surveys, and an end-of-the-year survey given to all Medicine house staff. Participants: Medicine house staff and medicine patients. Measures: Frequency of bedside rounds, duration of new patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and house staff attitudes regarding bedside rounds. Results: Forty-four residents completed the bedside rounding workshop. Comparing the preintervention and postintervention phases, bedside rounds increased from <1{\%} to 41{\%} (p<0.001). The average duration of walk rounding encounters was 16 min, and average duration of bedside rounding encounters was 15 min (p=0.42). Duration of rounds was 95 and 98 min, respectively (p=0.52). Patients receiving bedside rounds preferred bedside rounds (99{\%} vs. 83{\%}, p=0.03) and perceived more time spent at the bedside by their team (p<0.001). One hundred twelve house staff (71{\%}) responded, with 73{\%} reporting that bedside rounds are better for patient care. House staff performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe that bedside rounds were more educational (53{\%} vs. 78{\%}, p=0.01). Conclusions: Bedside rounding increased after an educational intervention, and the time to complete bedside rounding encounters was similar to alternative forms of rounding. Patients preferred bedside rounds and perceived more time spent at the bedside when receiving bedside rounds. Medicine residents performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe bedside rounds were more educational, but all house staff valued the importance of bedside rounding for the delivery of patient care.",
author = "Gonzalo, {Jed D.} and Chuang, {Cynthia H.} and Grace Huang and Christopher Smith",
year = "2010",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11606-010-1344-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "792--798",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "8",

}

The return of bedside rounds : An educational intervention. / Gonzalo, Jed D.; Chuang, Cynthia H.; Huang, Grace; Smith, Christopher.

In: Journal of general internal medicine, Vol. 25, No. 8, 01.08.2010, p. 792-798.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The return of bedside rounds

T2 - An educational intervention

AU - Gonzalo, Jed D.

AU - Chuang, Cynthia H.

AU - Huang, Grace

AU - Smith, Christopher

PY - 2010/8/1

Y1 - 2010/8/1

N2 - Background: Bedside rounds have decreased in frequency on teaching services. Perceived barriers toward bedside rounds are inefficiency and patient and house staff lack of preference for this mode of rounding. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a bedside rounding intervention on the frequency of bedside rounding, duration of patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and resident attitudes toward bedside rounds. Design: A pre- and postintervention design, with a bedside rounding workshop midway through two consecutive internal medicine rotations, with daily resident interviews, patient surveys, and an end-of-the-year survey given to all Medicine house staff. Participants: Medicine house staff and medicine patients. Measures: Frequency of bedside rounds, duration of new patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and house staff attitudes regarding bedside rounds. Results: Forty-four residents completed the bedside rounding workshop. Comparing the preintervention and postintervention phases, bedside rounds increased from <1% to 41% (p<0.001). The average duration of walk rounding encounters was 16 min, and average duration of bedside rounding encounters was 15 min (p=0.42). Duration of rounds was 95 and 98 min, respectively (p=0.52). Patients receiving bedside rounds preferred bedside rounds (99% vs. 83%, p=0.03) and perceived more time spent at the bedside by their team (p<0.001). One hundred twelve house staff (71%) responded, with 73% reporting that bedside rounds are better for patient care. House staff performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe that bedside rounds were more educational (53% vs. 78%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Bedside rounding increased after an educational intervention, and the time to complete bedside rounding encounters was similar to alternative forms of rounding. Patients preferred bedside rounds and perceived more time spent at the bedside when receiving bedside rounds. Medicine residents performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe bedside rounds were more educational, but all house staff valued the importance of bedside rounding for the delivery of patient care.

AB - Background: Bedside rounds have decreased in frequency on teaching services. Perceived barriers toward bedside rounds are inefficiency and patient and house staff lack of preference for this mode of rounding. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a bedside rounding intervention on the frequency of bedside rounding, duration of patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and resident attitudes toward bedside rounds. Design: A pre- and postintervention design, with a bedside rounding workshop midway through two consecutive internal medicine rotations, with daily resident interviews, patient surveys, and an end-of-the-year survey given to all Medicine house staff. Participants: Medicine house staff and medicine patients. Measures: Frequency of bedside rounds, duration of new patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and house staff attitudes regarding bedside rounds. Results: Forty-four residents completed the bedside rounding workshop. Comparing the preintervention and postintervention phases, bedside rounds increased from <1% to 41% (p<0.001). The average duration of walk rounding encounters was 16 min, and average duration of bedside rounding encounters was 15 min (p=0.42). Duration of rounds was 95 and 98 min, respectively (p=0.52). Patients receiving bedside rounds preferred bedside rounds (99% vs. 83%, p=0.03) and perceived more time spent at the bedside by their team (p<0.001). One hundred twelve house staff (71%) responded, with 73% reporting that bedside rounds are better for patient care. House staff performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe that bedside rounds were more educational (53% vs. 78%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Bedside rounding increased after an educational intervention, and the time to complete bedside rounding encounters was similar to alternative forms of rounding. Patients preferred bedside rounds and perceived more time spent at the bedside when receiving bedside rounds. Medicine residents performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe bedside rounds were more educational, but all house staff valued the importance of bedside rounding for the delivery of patient care.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954423239&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954423239&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11606-010-1344-7

DO - 10.1007/s11606-010-1344-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 20386997

AN - SCOPUS:77954423239

VL - 25

SP - 792

EP - 798

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

IS - 8

ER -