Rounds and Rounds We Go:
A New Era in the Delivery of Weekly Grand Rounds
Jose Francois MD MMedEd CCFP FCFP
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
José François MD MMedEd CCFP FCFP
•
No personal receipt of Industry funding
•
Not involved in any Industry funded research
•
No participation on Industry supported advisory boards
•
Directs a University CME Office which has received Industry funding for conferences it organizes
Objectives
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
• Describe the ethical and educational standards required of accredited
rounds programs
• Discuss strategies to incorporate the use of technology into rounds
• Explore approaches to facilitate the sharing of relevant content and
programs across universities and national specialty societies
• Discuss the impact of copyright legislation on the distribution of
Grand Rounds by electronic means
Current status of medical grand rounds
in departments of medicine at US medical schools.
Mueller PS, Segovis CM, Litin SC, Habermann TM, Parrino T
Mayo Clin Proc. 2006 Mar;81(3):313-21
Survey of 133 departments of medicine at US medical schools performed
from September 2003 to March 2004
Conclusion: Departments of medicine regard MGR as an important
educational and social endeavor. However, most departments use
suboptimal teaching, planning, and evaluation methods, and many rely on
industry to pay for MGR. Addressing these concerns and other challenges
may enhance the value of MGR
Mueller et al’s findings
• The most common format was the didactic lecture
• Case presentations were uncommonly used, and patients were rarely
present.
• Only 44% of departments used educational needs assessments
• Only 13% assessed knowledge gained by attendees
• Feedback was irregularly provided to presenters.
• Most departments (64%) relied on industry to pay for MGR.
• Lack of presenter-attendee interaction and conflicting meetings were
cited as important challenges
U of M experience
Present situation
• Large volume of activity, much under appreciated
• Variation between departments
U of M experience
Present situation
• Large volume of activity, much under appreciated
• Variation between departments
Desired situation
• Valued educational activity
• High quality education
U of M experience
Present situation
• Large volume of activity, much under appreciated
• Variation between departments
Standardizing
Training
Innovating
Desired situation
• Valued educational activity
• High quality education
U of M policy on RSS
• Educational Planning
– Identification of learner needs
– Determination of learning objectives
– Selection of the educational format
– Evaluation
• Management of commercial support
• Honoraria and reimbursement of expenses
• Disclosure and management of conflict of interest
• Annual reporting
Supporting RSS planners
• Faculty development
• Toolkit
• Feedback
Best Practices & Innovation
• Making round relevant through careful
needs assessments
• Increasing interactivity
• Results in changes made in practice
How would you redesign rounds?
Questions?
Comments …