Literature DB >> 33443704

Internal Medicine Residents' Perceptions of Morning Report: a Multicenter Survey.

Tyler J Albert1,2, Jeff Redinger3,4, Helene Starks3,5, Joel Bradley6,7, Craig G Gunderson8,9, Dan Heppe10,11, Kyle Kent12,13, Michael Krug3,14, Brian Kwan15,16, James Laudate6,7, Amanda Pensiero17,18, Gina Raymond19,20, Emily Sladek15,16, Joseph R Sweigart21, Paul B Cornia3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Residents rate morning report (MR) as an essential educational activity. Little contemporary evidence exists to guide medical educators on the optimal content or most effective delivery strategies, particularly in the era of resident duty-hour limitations and shifts towards learner-centric pedagogy in graduate medical education.
OBJECTIVE: Assess resident views about MR content and teaching strategies.
DESIGN: Anonymous, online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents from 10 VA-affiliated residency programs. MAIN MEASURES: The 20-item survey included questions on demographics; frequency and reason for attending; opinions on who should attend, who should teach, and how to prioritize the teaching; and respondents' comfort level with participating in MR. The survey included a combination of Likert-style and multiple-choice questions with the option for multiple responses. KEY
RESULTS: A total of 497 residents (46%) completed the survey, with a balanced sample of R1s (33%), R2s (35%), and R3s (31%). Self-reported MR attendance was high (31% always attend; 39% attend > 50% of the time), with clinical duties being the primary barrier to attendance (85%). Most respondents felt that medical students (89%), R1 (96%), and R2/R3s (96%) should attend MR; there was less consensus regarding including attendings (61%) or fellows (34%). Top-rated educational topics included demonstration of clinical reasoning (82%), evidence-based medicine (77%), and disease pathophysiology (53%). Respondents valued time spent on diagnostic work-up (94%), management (93%), and differential building (90%). Overall, 82% endorsed feeling comfortable speaking; fewer R1s reported comfort (76%) compared with R2s (87%) or R3s (83%, p = 0.018). Most (81%) endorsed that MR was an inclusive learning environment (81%), with no differences by level of training.
CONCLUSIONS: MR remains a highly regarded, well-attended educational conference. Residents value high-quality cases that emphasize clinical reasoning, diagnosis, and management. A supportive, engaging learning environment with expert input and concise, evidence-based teaching is desired.

Entities:  

Keywords:  graduate medical education; internal medicine residency; morning report; survey

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33443704      PMCID: PMC7947099          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-06351-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  21 in total

1.  New requirements for resident duty hours.

Authors:  Ingrid Philibert; Paul Friedmann; William T Williams
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-09-04       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The new recommendations on duty hours from the ACGME Task Force.

Authors:  Thomas J Nasca; Susan H Day; E Stephen Amis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Teaching clinical reasoning: case-based and coached.

Authors:  Jerome P Kassirer
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

Authors:  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh; Sarah E Shannon
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2005-11

5.  Adult learning theories: implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83.

Authors:  David C M Taylor; Hossam Hamdy
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 3.650

6.  Morning report: can an established medical education tradition be validated?

Authors:  Matthew McNeill; Sayed K Ali; Daniel E Banks; Ishak A Mansi
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2013-09

7.  The principles and practice of morning report.

Authors:  T A Parrino; A G Villanueva
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-08-08       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Morning report. A survey of resident attitudes.

Authors:  M Ways; K Kroenke; J Umali; D Buchwald
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1995-07-10

9.  Morning report. A successful format.

Authors:  L E Pupa; J L Carpenter
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1985-05

10.  Design for a successful morning report.

Authors:  R B Gibbons
Journal:  Mil Med       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 1.437

View more
  1 in total

1.  Internal Medicine Residents' Perceptions of Virtual Morning Report: a Multicenter Survey.

Authors:  Tyler J Albert; Joel Bradley; Helene Starks; Jeff Redinger; Cherinne Arundel; Albertine Beard; Laura Caputo; Jonathan Chun; Craig G Gunderson; Dan Heppe; Anand Jagannath; Kyle Kent; Michael Krug; James Laudate; Vignesh Palaniappan; Amanda Pensiero; Zaven Sargsyan; Emily Sladek; Matthew Tuck; Paul B Cornia
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 6.473

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.