Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34994682›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2022

Observation tool to measure patient-centered behaviors on rounds in an academic medical center.

Michelle Sharp, Nicole Williams, Sean Tackett, Laura A Hanyok, Colleen Christmas, Cynthia S Rand, Roy C Ziegelstein, Janet D Record

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Michelle SharpDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Nicole WilliamsDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Sean TackettDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5369-7225
Laura A HanyokDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8478-8875
Colleen ChristmasDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Cynthia S RandDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Roy C ZiegelsteinDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Janet D RecordDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

MULTIDISCIPLINARY TRAINING PROGRAM IN LUNG DISEASEST32HL007534 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Nadia N Hansel, Larissa A. Shimoda · 1985 to 2026
$28.3M
Medication Adherence and Clinical Outcomes in SarcoidosisK23HL148527 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SHARP, MICHELLE · 2021 to 2025
$886k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL148527NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007534
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAs part of a quality improvement project, we developed and employed an observation checklist to measure patient-centered behaviors during daily rounds to assess the frequency of patient-centered behaviors among a patient-centered care (PCC) team and standard team (ST) rounds. PATIENTS AND

methodsOn four general medicine service (GMS) teaching teams at an urban academic medical center in which housestaff rotate, we utilized an observation checklist to assess the occurrence of eight behaviors on inpatient daily rounds. The checklist covered domains of patient-centered communication, etiquette-based behaviors, and shared decision-making. One GMS team is guided by a PCC curriculum that emphasizes patient-centered communication strategies, but not specifically behaviors during bedside rounds.

resultsBetween August 2018 and May 2019 a trained observer completed 448 observations of patient rounding encounters using the checklist. Across all teams, 46.0% of the 8 behaviors were performed when possible, with more done on the PCC team (58.0%) than ST (42.0%), p < 0.01.

conclusionsPerformance of patient-centered behaviors during daily rounds was low overall. Despite having no specific instruction on daily rounds, patient-centered behaviors were more frequent among the teams which were part of a PCC curriculum. However, the frequency of observed behaviors was modest, suggesting that more explicit efforts to change rounding behaviors are needed. Our observational checklist may be a tool to assist in future interventions to improve patient-centered behaviors on daily rounds.

Indexed as

Internship and ResidencyTeaching RoundsAcademic Medical CentersHumansPatient Care TeamPatient-Centered CareeducationPatient-centered carepatient-centered communicationroundsshared-decision making

Identifiers

PMID34994682
PMCPMC8745350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.