Joseph Gigante

What’s the Story? Expectations for Oral Case Presentations

This article focuses on teaching and evaluating oral presentation skills as part of the ongoing Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics (COMSEP) series on skills and strategies used by superb clinical teachers. While oral presentations by students can be used to enhance diagnostic reasoning,1 we will focus this article on the characteristics of high-quality oral presentations by medical students, highlight several common pitfalls, and reinforce the connection between effective oral presentations and clinical reasoning. A model for evaluating student clinical performance, the RIME model, will be reviewed. Students often struggle with what is expected of them when asked to give an oral presentation of a patient encounter. Many preceptors have asked a student to present a case, only to be answered with the question, “What would you like to hear?” Students frequently perceive the oral presentation as “a rule-based, data-storage activity governed by order and structure.”2 Clinicians, however, view the oral presentation as a flexible form of communication, with content determined by the clinical context and audience. The first step in bridging this gap is to set explicit expectations. Students should be told early in the clinical experience the commonly accepted and expected style for oral presentations and the rationale for the organization. The ultimate goal of the presentation is to provide the justification for diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. Table 1 summarizes the elements of an effective oral presentation.3 View this table: TABLE 1 Oral Presentation Expectations Checklist3 ### Chief Complaint: Who Are We Talking About? Presenting information in an expected order makes it easier for listeners to process information. This begins with the chief complaint. Either a direct quote (eg, “My tummy hurts”) or an identifying statement (“A 6-year-old girl with fever and abdominal pain”) sets the context for this patient’s story from the first line (a different context than that … Address correspondence to Michael Dell, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital, 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44122. E-mail: michael.dell{at}uhhospitals.org

Learning about screening using an online or live lecture: Does it matter?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of an online lecture versus a live lecture on screening given to medical students who are participating in an outpatient clerkship.DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled study.PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Ninety-five senior medical students in a primary care medicine clerkship based at university and distant clinic sites.INTERVENTION AND MEASUREMENTS: Forty-eight medical students were randomized to the live lecture on screening (live lecture group), and forty-seven medical students were randomized to the online lecture on screening (online lecture group). Outcome measures included students’ knowledge, use of time, and satisfaction with the lecture experience.RESULTS: Compared to students in the live lecture group, students in the online lecture group demonstrated equal post-intervention knowledge of screening (P=.91) and expended 50 minutes less time to complete the lecture. Online lecture students who used the audio feed of the lecture were equally satisfied with the lecture as the live lecture students. Without the audio feed, online lecture students were less satisfied.CONCLUSIONS: An online lecture on screening is a feasible, efficient, and effective method to teach students on outpatient clerkships about principles of screening.

Getting Beyond “Good Job”: How to Give Effective Feedback

This article is the fourth in a series by the Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics (COMSEP) reviewing the critical attributes and skills of superb clinical teachers. The previous article in this series reviewed the vital importance of direct observation of students.1 The purpose of this article is to describe how to use the information gained from the direct observation, namely the role of feedback. Although too often used interchangeably, encouragement, evaluation, and feedback are quite distinct. Encouragement (eg, “good job!”) is supportive but does nothing to improve the learners skills. Evaluation is summative and is the final judgment of the learners performance. Feedback, however, is designed to improve future performance. This article focuses on feedback—what it is, why it is important, some of the barriers to effective feedback, and how to give helpful feedback.

A randomised trial of an online lecture with and without audio.

Objective  To determine the impact of adding audio‐feed to an online lecture on screening given to medical students who were participating in an outpatient clerkship.

Automatic Capture of Student Notes to Augment Mentor Feedback and Student Performance on Patient Write-Ups

ObjectiveTo determine whether the integration of an automated electronic clinical portfolio into clinical clerkships can improve the quality of feedback given to students on their patient write-ups and the quality of students’ write-ups.DesignThe authors conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled study of an electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects all students’ clinical notes and notifies their teachers (attending and resident physicians) via e-mail. Third-year medical students were randomized to use the electronic portfolio or traditional paper means. Teachers in the portfolio group provided feedback directly on the student’s write-up using a web-based application. Teachers in the control group provided feedback directly on the student’s write-up by writing in the margins of the paper. Outcomes were teacher and student assessment of the frequency and quality of feedback on write-ups, expert assessment of the quality of student write-ups at the end of the clerkship, and participant assessment of the value of the electronic portfolio system.ResultsTeachers reported giving more frequent and detailed feedback using the portfolio system (p = 0.01). Seventy percent of students who used the portfolio system, versus 39% of students in the control group (p = 0.001), reported receiving feedback on more than half of their write-ups. Write-ups of portfolio students were rated of similar quality to write-ups of control students. Teachers and students agreed that the system was a valuable teaching tool and easy to use.ConclusionsAn electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects students’ clinical notes is associated with improved teacher feedback on write-ups and similar quality of write-ups.

A facilitated peer mentoring program for junior faculty to promote professional development and peer networking.

Purpose To explore the design, implementation, and efficacy of a faculty development program in a cohort of early career junior faculty. Method Interested junior faculty members were divided into interdisciplinary small groups led by senior faculty facilitators. The groups met monthly for 1.5 hours to review a modular curriculum from 2011 to 2013. Using a survey at two time points (September 2011 and 2013) and an interim program evaluation, the authors collected data on participants’ demographics, faculty interconnectedness, and self-reported knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) in the domains of professional development and scholarship, including the ability to write career goals and align activities with those goals. Results A total of 104 junior faculty participated in the program. They demonstrated changes in self-reported KSA in the domains of professional development (P = .013, P = .001) and scholarship (P = .038, P = .015) with an increase in ability to write career goals (P < .001), ability to align activities with those goals (P < .001), and number of and amount of time spent pursuing activities related to those goals (P = .022). These changes were more significant among female faculty and were not affected by academic rank or time since last training. Interconnectedness among faculty increased during the period of study—the number of nodes and ties between nodes within the network increased. Conclusions This facilitated peer mentoring program for junior faculty was effective in improving the KSA necessary to promote early career advancement and peer networking, especially for women.

Medical evaluation of children with chronic abdominal pain: Impact of diagnosis, physician practice orientation, and maternal trait anxiety on mothers’ responses to the evaluation

ABSTRACT This study examined the effects of diagnosis (functional versus organic), physician practice orientation (biomedical versus biopsychosocial), and maternal trait anxiety (high versus low) on mothers’ responses to a child’s medical evaluation for chronic abdominal pain. Mothers selected for high (n = 80) and low (n = 80) trait anxiety imagined that they were the mother of a child with chronic abdominal pain described in a vignette. They completed questionnaires assessing their negative affect and pain catastrophizing. Next, mothers were randomly assigned to view one of four video vignettes of a physician‐actor reporting results of the child’s medical evaluation. Vignettes varied by diagnosis (functional versus organic) and physician practice orientation (biomedical versus biopsychosocial). Following presentation of the vignettes, baseline questionnaires were re‐administered and mothers rated their satisfaction with the physician. Results indicated that mothers in all conditions reported reduced distress pre‐ to post‐vignette; however, the degree of the reduction differed as a function of diagnosis, presentation, and anxiety. Mothers reported more post‐vignette negative affect, pain catastrophizing, and dissatisfaction with the physician when the physician presented a functional rather than an organic diagnosis. These effects were significantly greater for mothers with high trait anxiety who received a functional diagnosis presented by a physician with a biomedical orientation than for mothers in any other condition. Anxious mothers of children evaluated for chronic abdominal pain may be less distressed and more satisfied when a functional diagnosis is delivered by a physician with a biopsychosocial rather than a biomedical orientation.

Anaphylaxis, urticaria, and angioedema.

OBJECTIVES After completing this article, readers should be able to: 1. List the etiologic agents that commonly cause urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis. 2. Recognize the signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis and be able to deliver rapid,effective treatment for anaphylaxis. 3. Distinguish between acute and chronic urticaria, and recognize the differences in their evaluation and treatment. 4. List the causes of papular urticaria. 5. Discuss the acute management of stinging insect anaphylaxis.

You Too Can Teach Clinical Reasoning

* Abbreviations: HSP — : Henoch-Schonlein Purpura RLQ — : right lower quadrant As part of the ongoing Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics series on skills and strategies used by great clinical teachers,1–6 this article focuses on practical knowledge and skills for teaching clinical reasoning. Building on SNAPPS and One Minute Preceptor models,6 we will address the clinical assessment portion of oral and written presentations that represents the culmination of the clinical reasoning process. Using the concepts of problem representation,7 semantic qualifiers,8 and illness scripts7,9,10 defined below, we will outline how you can guide your students’ clinical reasoning development. A problem representation is “the one-liner” at the end of a presentation that synthesizes the entire patient story (history details, physical findings, and investigations) into 1 “big picture” statement.7 To create a problem representation, physicians restructure pertinent patient details into abstract terms called semantic qualifiers. Semantic qualifiers are abstractions in medical rather than lay terminology and generally exist in divergent pairs, such as acute versus chronic and severe versus mild (Table 1, step 2).8 Here is an example of a problem representation, with the semantic qualifiers in italics: A previously well, 2-year-old unimmunized girl presents with an acute history of respiratory distress. She is febrile , looks unwell , and is drooling. View this table: TABLE 1 Teaching Steps for Clinical Reasoning Novice clinicians can be taught to generate problem representations by using semantic qualifiers. First, have your students write out a 1- to 2-sentence problem representation (summary of patient information) based on either a written … Address correspondence to Joseph Gigante, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, 8232 Doctor’s Office Tower, Nashville, TN 37232-9225. E-mail: joseph.gigante{at}vanderbilt.edu

A Simplified Observation Tool for Residents in the Outpatient Clinic

BACKGROUND The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education promotes direct observation of residents as a key assessment tool for competency in patient care, professionalism, and communication skills. Although tools exist, validity and reliability have not been demonstrated for most, and many tools may have limited feasibility because of time constraints and other reasons. We conducted a study to measure feasibility of a simplified observation tool to evaluate these competencies and provide timely feedback. METHODS In the pediatric resident continuity clinic of a large childrens hospital, we used a direct observation form with a 3-point scale for 16 items in the domains of patient care, professionalism, and communication skills. The form was divided by portion of visit, with specific items mapped to 1 or more of the competencies, and was used to provide direct oral feedback to the resident. Faculty and residents completed surveys rating the process (ease of use, satisfaction, and self-assessed usefulness) on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS The study encompassed 89 surveys completed by attending physicians; 98% (87 of 89) of the time the form was easy to use, 99% (88) of the time its use did not interfere with patient flow, and 93% (83) of the observations provided useful information for resident feedback. Residents completed 70 surveys, with the majority (69%, 48) reporting they were comfortable about being observed by an attending physician; 87% (61) thought that direct observation did not significantly affect their efficiency. Ninety-seven percent of the time (68) residents reported that direct observation provided useful feedback. CONCLUSION The data suggest the form was well-received by both faculty and residents, and enabled attending physicians to provide useful feedback.