Introduction: Patient handoffs from emergency physicians (EP) to internal medicine (IM) physicians may be complicated by conflict with the potential for adverse outcomes. The objective of this study was to identify the specific types of, and contributors to, conflict between EPs and IM physicians in this context. Methods: We performed a qualitative focus group study using a constructivist grounded theory approach involving emergency medicine (EM) and IM residents and faculty at a large academic medical center. Focus groups assessed perspectives and experiences of EP/IM physician interactions related to patient handoffs. We interpreted data with the matrix analytic method. Results: From May to December 2019, 24 residents (IM = 11, EM = 13) and 11 faculty (IM = 6, EM = 5) from the two departments participated in eight focus groups and two interviews. Two key themes emerged: 1) disagreements about disposition (ie, whether a patient needed to be admitted, should go to an intensive care unit, or required additional testing before transfer to the floor); and 2) contextual factors (ie, the request to discuss an admission being a primer for conflict; lack of knowledge of the other person and their workflow; high clinical workload and volume; and different interdepartmental perspectives on the benefits of a rapid emergency department workflow). Conclusions: Causes of conflict at patient handover between EPs and IM physicians are related primarily to disposition concerns and contextual factors. Using theoretical models of task, process, and relationship conflict, we suggest recommendations to improve the EM/IM interaction to potentially reduce conflict and advance patient care.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: In the context of inpatient general medicine, "rounding" refers to the process of seeing, assessing, and caring for patients as a team. The clinical leadership skills required of residents to lead rounds are essential to inpatient care and clinical education. Assessment of these skills has relevance to developing competent physicians; however, there is an absence of widely accepted tools to specifically measure this competency. OBJECTIVE: To develop and collect validity evidence for a direct observation instrument of internal medicine residents' leadership skills during daily inpatient care rounds for future formative assessment. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: PGY2 and PGY3 internal medicine residents. MAIN MEASURES: The authors collected inferences of validity evidence according to Kane's validity model. They performed direct observations of PGY2 and PGY3 residents by individual faculty and trained raters and measured inter-rater reliability, using the kappa statistic. Mixed linear regression models were used to compare PGY2 and PGY3 residents. Surveys captured faculty perceptions about value of the instrument. KEY RESULTS: A total of 223 observations were performed in 92 unique individuals. Twenty-four faculty used the observation instrument, of which 18 (75%) completed the post-survey, and 100% agreed that the instrument represented the resident's global leadership abilities. Inter-rater reliability was strong, with an overall kappa statistic equaling 0.82. The mean performance for PGY2 and PGY3 residents was 15.9 (SD 5.1) and 17.7 (SD 4.1), respectively. Adjusting for repeated measures, there was no statistically significant difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The authors reported evidence for all four stages of validity and use of the instrument in clinical practice. Their work provides a codification of best practices of rounding leadership, which directly impacts the education of trainees, care of hospitalized patients, and use for formative assessment. The instrument also has the potential to be used for summative assessment.

Background: Home visits are an important part of Geriatrics education for medical and dental students (MS), and the lessons learned by students from these experiences inform further curriculum development. A mixed methods analysis of students' lessons learned from a single Geriatrics home visit shapes the future focus and impact of similar educational programs to ultimately improve the care of older adults. Methods: Over a 3-year period at Harvard Medical School, approximately 495 first year MS participated in an educational Geriatrics home visit to learn about the geriatric assessment. Three hundred and forty-eight students completed voluntary anonymous evaluation forms, rating whether their interest in geriatrics increased after the home visit and describing two lessons learned. We analyzed the student responses and conducted a qualitative content analysis of the lessons learned, identifying major themes within the Geriatrics 5Ms Framework (Mobility, Mind, Medications, Multicomplexity, and Matters Most).Results: Most students (70.7%) reported their interest in Geriatrics somewhat or greatly increased after the home visit. Three hundred and ten students (89% of participants) reported 605 lessons learned; 174 students' lesson learned related to Multicomplexity (56.1%), and 158 students reported a lesson related to Mobility (51%).Discussion: After a Geriatrics home visit, a majority of students report an increase interest in Geriatrics. The most common lessons learned relate to Mobility and Multicomplexity, essential areas of focus in a Geriatrics curriculum. Educational home visits are an important opportunity to increase student interest in geriatrics and build their skills to improve the care of older adults using the Geriatrics 5Ms Framework.