L. James Nixon

Should we Google it? Resource use by internal medicine residents for point-of-care clinical decision making.

Purpose To determine which resources residents use at the point-of-care (POC) for decision making, the drivers for selection of these resources, and how residents use Google/Google Scholar to answer clinical questions at the POC. Method In January 2012, 299 residents from three internal medicine residencies were sent an electronic survey regarding resources used for POC decision making. Resource use frequency and factors influencing choice were determined using descriptive statistics. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to determine relationships between the independent variables. Results A total of 167 residents (56%) responded; similar numbers responded at each level of training. Residents most frequently reported using UpToDate and Google at the POC at least daily (85% and 63%, respectively), with speed and trust in the quality of information being the primary drivers of selection. Google, used by 68% of residents, was used primarily to locate Web sites and general information about diseases, whereas Google Scholar, used by 30% of residents, tended to be used for treatment and management decisions or locating a journal article. Conclusions The findings suggest that internal medicine residents use UpToDate most frequently, followed by consultation with faculty and the search engines Google and Google Scholar; speed, trust, and portability are the biggest drivers for resource selection; and time and information overload appear to be the biggest barriers to resources such as Ovid MEDLINE. Residents frequently used Google and may benefit from further training in information management skills.

A collaborative model for developing and maintaining virtual patients for medical education

There is great interest in using computer-assisted instruction in medical education, but getting computer-assisted instruction materials used broadly is difficult to achieve. We describe a successful model for the development and maintenance of a specific type of computer-assisted instruction – virtual patients – in medical education. The collaborative models seven key components are described and compared to other models of diffusion of innovation and curriculum development. The collaborative development model that began in one medical discipline is now extended to two additional disciplines, through partnerships with their respective clerkship director organizations. We believe that the ability to achieve broad use of virtual patients, and to transition the programs from successfully relying on grant funding to financially self-sustaining, resulted directly from the collaborative development and maintenance process. This process can be used in other learning environments and for the development of other types of computer-assisted instruction programs.

Educating Clerkship Students in the Era of Resident Duty Hour Restrictions

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Department of Defense at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Universityof Nebraska - Lincoln.

The Effect of Resident Duty-Hours Restrictions on Internal Medicine Clerkship Experiences: Surveys of Medical Students and Clerkship Directors

Phenomenon: Medical students receive much of their inpatient teaching from residents who now experience restructured teaching services to accommodate the 2011 duty-hour regulations (DHR). The effect of DHR on medical student educational experiences is unknown. We examined medical students’ and clerkship directors’ perceptions of the effects of the 2011 DHR on internal medicine clerkship students’ experiences with teaching, feedback and evaluation, and patient care. Approach: Students at 14 institutions responded to surveys after their medicine clerkship or subinternship. Students who completed their clerkship (n = 839) and subinternship (n = 228) March to June 2011 (pre-DHR historical controls) were compared to clerkship students (n = 895) and subinterns (n = 377) completing these rotations March to June 2012 (post-DHR). Z tests for proportions correcting for multiple comparisons were performed to assess attitude changes. The Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine annual survey queried institutional members about the 2011 DHR just after implementation. Findings: Survey response rates were 64% and 50% for clerkship students and 60% and 48% for subinterns in 2011 and 2012 respectively, and 82% (99/121) for clerkship directors. Post-DHR, more clerkship students agreed that attendings (p =.011) and interns (p =.044) provided effective teaching. Clerkship students (p =.013) and subinterns (p =.001) believed patient care became more fragmented. The percentage of holdover patients clerkship students (p =.001) and subinterns (p =.012) admitted increased. Clerkship directors perceived negative effects of DHR for students on all survey items. Most disagreed that interns (63.1%), residents (67.8%), or attendings (71.1%) had more time to teach. Most disagreed that students received more feedback from interns (56.0%) or residents (58.2%). Fifty-nine percent felt that students participated in more patient handoffs. Insights: Students perceive few adverse consequences of the 2011 DHR on their internal medicine experiences, whereas their clerkship director educators have negative perceptions. Future research should explore the impact of fragmented patient care on the student–patient relationship and students’ clinical skills acquisition.

How we developed and piloted an electronic key features examination for the internal medicine clerkship based on a US national curriculum

Abstract Background: Key features examinations (KFEs) have been used to assess clinical decision making in medical education, yet there are no reports of an online KFE-based on a national curriculum for the internal medicine clerkship. What we did: The authors developed and pilot tested an electronic KFE based on the US Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine core curriculum. Teams, with expert oversight and peer review, developed key features (KFs) and cases. Evaluation: The exam was pilot tested at eight medical schools with 162 third and fourth year medical students, of whom 96 (59.3%) responded to a survey. While most students reported that the exam was more difficult than a multiple choice question exam, 61 (83.3%) students agreed that it reflected problems seen in clinical practice and 51 (69.9%) students reported that it more accurately assessed the ability to make clinical decisions. Conclusions: The development of an electronic KFs exam is a time-intensive process. A team approach offers built-in peer review and accountability. Students, although not familiar with this format in the US, recognized it as authentically assessing clinical decision-making for problems commonly seen in the clerkship.

Competency-Based Medical Education in the Internal Medicine Clerkship: A Report From the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Undergraduate Medical Education Task Force

As medical educators continue to redefine learning and assessment across the continuum, implementation of competency-based medical education in the undergraduate setting has become a focus of many medical schools. While standards of competency have been defined for the graduating student, there is no uniform approach for defining competency expectations for students during their core clerkship year. The authors describe the process by which an Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine task force developed a paradigm for competency-based assessment of students during their inpatient internal medicine (IM) clerkship. Building on work at the resident and fellowship levels, the task force focused on the development of key learning outcomes as defined by entrustable professional activities (EPAs) that were specific to educational experiences on the IM clerkship, as well as identification of high-priority assessment domains. The work was informed by a national survey of clerkship directors.Six key EPAs emerged: generating a differential diagnosis, obtaining a complete and accurate history and physical exam, obtaining focused histories and clinically relevant physical exams, preparing an oral presentation, interpreting the results of basic diagnostic studies, and providing well-organized clinical documentation. A model for assessment was proposed, with descriptors aligned to the scale of supervision and mapped to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education domains of competence. The proposed paradigm offers a standardized template that may be used across IM clerkships, and which would effectively bridge competency evaluation in the clerkship to fourth-year assessment as well as eventual postgraduate training.