ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Optimizing Resident Education during Family-centered Rounds: An Educational Improvement Initiative.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Pilot Longitudinal Clinical Reasoning Curriculum for Pediatric Residents.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Family-centered rounding (FCR) allows the medical team to partner with patients in medical decision-making, improving communication, and enhancing safety. However, FCR may compromise aspects of the resident education experience. In a survey of pediatric residents at our children's hospital, only 20% felt FCR provided the best educational experience. We designed this project to increase the percentage of residents with a positive perception of the educational experience on FCR from 20% to 80% in 6 months. Methods: This project utilized The Model for Improvement and sequential plan-do-study-act cycles. A needs assessment identified educational activities negatively impacted by FCR. We then designed a hybrid FCR process with formal presentations outside patient rooms followed by traditional bedside FCR. Our primary measure was the percentage of residents positively perceiving the FCR educational experience. Our balancing measures included rounding duration and family satisfaction and comprehension. Results: Residents who perceive FCR to be the best educational experience improved from a baseline of 21% to 76%, with a calculated response rate of 79%. Patients receiving FCR remained above 80%. All surveyed families understood their care plans and remained satisfied with the information provided, although 21% were concerned about the number of people present on rounds during the COVID-19 pandemic. Forty-three percent of hospitalist rounds exceeded the allotted time. Conclusions: The hybridization of FCR to include formal presentations may improve the resident learning experience while preserving family satisfaction and comprehension.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.