Original Article

Patients’ Perceptions of Bedside Rounding

Authors: Allen F. Shih, AM, Nana O. Addo-Tabiri, MD, Andre N. Sofair, MD, MPH

Abstract

Objectives: Concerns regarding lack of privacy, poor patient understanding, and physician discomfort have led to a decline in rounding at the bedside. Our project explored patient perceptions of the implementation and value of bedside rounding.

Methods: This mixed-methods study used semi-structured qualitative interviews and a five-item Likert survey, which included questions about patients’ experiences with rounds, their comfort level with the rounding process, and their understanding of care after rounds. Interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative method and conducted until thematic saturation occurred.

Results: Patients described positive attributes of bedside rounds: meeting the medical team, helping teach the medical team, and understanding more about their illness. Although patients enjoyed undivided attention from physicians, distractions included too many participants in rounds, confusion about roles, and unclear expectations about the goal of rounds. Although physicians sought to use patient-centered language, 53% of patients stated that medical jargon was still used. Male patients reported a statistically significant improvement in their understanding about the plan for the day and borderline significance regarding knowing who was responsible for their care as compared with female patients.

Conclusions: Well-conducted, patient-centered bedside rounds greatly enhance patient–physician rapport and foster patient understanding and satisfaction.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first.

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view your purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($15)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Osler W. On the need of radical reform in our methods of teaching senior students. Med News 1903;82:49-53.
 
2. Linfors EW, Neelon FA. Sounding boards. The case of bedside rounds. N Engl J Med 1980;303:1230-1233.
 
3. Gonzalo JD, Masters PA, Simons RJ, et al. Attending rounds and bedside case presentations: medical student and medicine resident experiences and attitudes. Teach Learn Med 2009;21:105-110.
 
4. Ramirez J, Singh J, Williams AA. Patient satisfaction with bedside teaching rounds compared with nonbedside rounds. South Med J 2016;109:112-115.
 
5. Gonzalo JD, Heist BS, Duffy BL, et al. The art of bedside rounds: a multi-center qualitative study of strategies used by experienced bedside teachers. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:412-420.
 
6. Payson HE, Barchas JD. A time study of medical teaching rounds. N Engl J Med 1965;273:1468-1471.
 
7. Gonzalo JD, Heist BS, Duffy BL, et al. Identifying and overcoming the barriers to bedside rounds: a multicenter qualitative study. Acad Med 2014;89:326-334.
 
8. Peters M, ten Cate O. Bedside teaching in medical education: a literature review. Perspect Med Educ 2014;3:76-88.
 
9. Lehmann LS, Brancati FL, Chen MC, et al. The effect of bedside case presentations on patients’ perceptions of their medical care. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1150-1155.
 
10. Rogers HD, Carline JD, Paauw DS. Examination room presentations in general internal medicine clinic: patients’ and students’ perceptions. Acad Med 2003;78:945-949.
 
11. Wang-Cheng RM, Barnas GP, Sigmann P, et al. Bedside case presentations: why patients like them but learners don’. J Gen Intern Med 1989;4:284-287.
 
12. Majdan JF, Berg KT, Schultz KL, et al. Patient perceptions of bedside teaching rounds. Med Educ 2013;47:1124-1125.
 
13. Willig C. Grounded theory methodology. In: Introducing Qualitative Research in Psychology. Vol 17. 3rd ed. Maidenhead, UK:Open University Press;2013;:69-82.
 
14. Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res 2007;42:1758-1772.
 
15. LaCombe MA. On bedside teaching. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:217-220.
 
16. Fletcher KE, Furney SL, Stern DT. Patients speak: what’ really important about bedside interactions with physician teams. Teach Learn Med 2007;19:120-127.
 
17. Sarsons H, Xu G. Confidence men? Gender and confidence: evidence among top economists. http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/sarsons/files/confidence_final.pdf. Published July 14, 2015. Accessed February 25, 2018.