Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Oct;17(5):483-488.
doi: 10.1111/tct.13228. Epub 2020 Jul 28.

Contemporary practice of standardised bedside teaching rounds

Affiliations
Review

Contemporary practice of standardised bedside teaching rounds

Clarence Haddon Mullins et al. Clin Teach. 2020 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this article is to review the extant literature on bedside teaching rounds within the context of ward rounds performed with the entire clinical team at the patient's bedside, and to assess the effects of standardisation of this process on patient and learner satisfaction, as well as other duty-hour restrictions and patient care metrics in the academic inpatient setting. Ultimately, the intent of this review is to inform faculty development sessions for educators on the benefits and challenges of standardised rounding protocols.

Methods: We performed a search of PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL databases (from 2003 to August 2019). Randomised, controlled trials, pre- and post-interventional studies and cohort studies, in English, were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently searched, screened and analysed the studies, and a narrative synthesis was performed. Articles were evaluated methodologically using the Medical Education Research Quality Study Instrument (MERQSI).

Results: Five articles were included, with one randomised controlled trial, three cohort studies, and one pre- and post-interventional study. The collective MERSQI score for the studies was 12.3. Patient satisfaction increased uniformly across studies when standardised practices were used. Attempts to improve learner satisfaction, however, achieved mixed results. In addition, the time of bedside rounds was found to decrease with standardised interventions overall.

Conclusion: In light of generally positive albeit limited evidence for standardised rounding practices, faculty development initiatives might use these data to inform and educate faculty members regarding the use of standardised protocols for bedside rounds.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Shoeb M, Khanna R, Fang M, Sharpe B, Finn K, Ranji S, Monash B. Internal medicine rounding practices and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies. J Hosp Med 2014;9(4):239–243. - PubMed
    1. Verghese A. Culture shock—patient as icon, icon as patient. N Engl J Med 2008;359(26):2748–2751. - PubMed
    1. Gonzalo JD, Masters PA, Simons RJ, Chuang CH. Attending rounds and bedside case presentations: medical student and medicine resident experiences and attitudes. Teach Learn Med 2009;21(2):105–110. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reed DA, Beckman TJ, Wright SM, Levine RB, Kern DE, Cook DA. Predictive validity evidence for medical education research study quality instrument scores: quality of submissions to JGIM's Medical Education Special Issue. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23(7):903–907. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Monash B, Najafi N, Mourad M, et al. Standardized Attending Rounds to Improve the Patient Experience: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial. J Hosp Med 2017;12(3):143–149. - PubMed