Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2019

01-03-2019 | Care | Review Paper

Effect of Bedside vs. Non-bedside Patient Case Presentation During Ward Rounds: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Authors: Martina Gamp, PhD, Christoph Becker, MD, Theresa Tondorf, M. Sc., Seraina Hochstrasser, MD, Kerstin Metzger, MD, Gunther Meinlschmidt, PhD, Wolf Langewitz, MD, Rainer Schäfert, MD, Stefano Bassetti, MD, Sabina Hunziker, MD, MPH

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Ward rounds are important for communicating with patients, but it is unclear whether bedside or non-bedside case presentation is the better approach.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search up to July 2018 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bedside and non-bedside case presentations. Data was abstracted independently by two researchers and study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Our primary outcome was patient’s satisfaction with ward rounds. Our main secondary outcome was patient’s understanding of disease and the management plan.

Results

Among 1647 identified articles, we included five RCTs involving 655 participants with overall moderate trial quality. We found no difference in having low patient’s satisfaction between bedside and non-bedside case presentations (risk ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.09). We also found no impact on patient’s understanding of their disease and management plan (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.28). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicated low power of our main analysis.

Discussion

We found no differences in patient-relevant outcomes between bedside and non-bedside case presentations with a lack of statistical power among current trials. There is a need for larger studies to find the optimal approach to patient case presentation during ward rounds.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm : A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, CC: National Academy Press; 2001. Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm : A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, CC: National Academy Press; 2001.
2.
go back to reference Berwick DM. What ‘patient-centered’ should mean: confessions of an extremist. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28:w555–65.CrossRef Berwick DM. What ‘patient-centered’ should mean: confessions of an extremist. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28:w555–65.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Epstein RM, Street RL, Jr. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9:100–3.CrossRef Epstein RM, Street RL, Jr. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9:100–3.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Langewitz W, Ackermann S, Heierle A, Hertwig R, Ghanim L, Bingisser R. Improving patient recall of information: Harnessing the power of structure. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98:716–21.CrossRef Langewitz W, Ackermann S, Heierle A, Hertwig R, Ghanim L, Bingisser R. Improving patient recall of information: Harnessing the power of structure. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98:716–21.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Krupp W, Spanehl O, Laubach W, Seifert V. Informed consent in neurosurgery: patients’ recall of preoperative discussion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2000;142:233–8; discussion 8–9.CrossRef Krupp W, Spanehl O, Laubach W, Seifert V. Informed consent in neurosurgery: patients’ recall of preoperative discussion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2000;142:233–8; discussion 8–9.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Wang-Cheng RM, Barnas GP, Sigmann P, Riendl PA, Young MJ. Bedside case presentations: why patients like them but learners don’t. J Gen Intern Med. 1989;4:284–7.CrossRef Wang-Cheng RM, Barnas GP, Sigmann P, Riendl PA, Young MJ. Bedside case presentations: why patients like them but learners don’t. J Gen Intern Med. 1989;4:284–7.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Stewart LA, Clarke M, Rovers M, Riley RD, Simmonds M, Stewart G, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 2015;313:1657–65.CrossRef Stewart LA, Clarke M, Rovers M, Riley RD, Simmonds M, Stewart G, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 2015;313:1657–65.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Lehmann LS, Brancati FL, Chen MC, Roter D, Dobs AS. The effect of bedside case presentations on patients’ perceptions of their medical care. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1150–5.CrossRef Lehmann LS, Brancati FL, Chen MC, Roter D, Dobs AS. The effect of bedside case presentations on patients’ perceptions of their medical care. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1150–5.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Ramirez J, Singh J, Williams AA. Patient’s satisfaction with Bedside Teaching Rounds Compared with Nonbedside Rounds. South Med J. 2016;109:112–5.CrossRef Ramirez J, Singh J, Williams AA. Patient’s satisfaction with Bedside Teaching Rounds Compared with Nonbedside Rounds. South Med J. 2016;109:112–5.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference O’Leary KJ, Killarney A, Hansen LO, Jones S, Malladi M, Marks K, et al. Effect of patient-centred bedside rounds on hospitalised patients’ decision control, activation and satisfaction with care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:921–8.CrossRef O’Leary KJ, Killarney A, Hansen LO, Jones S, Malladi M, Marks K, et al. Effect of patient-centred bedside rounds on hospitalised patients’ decision control, activation and satisfaction with care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:921–8.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Seo M, Tamura K, Morioka E, Shijo H. Impact of medical round on patients’ and residents’ perceptions at a university hospital in Japan. Med Educ. 2000;34:409–11.CrossRef Seo M, Tamura K, Morioka E, Shijo H. Impact of medical round on patients’ and residents’ perceptions at a university hospital in Japan. Med Educ. 2000;34:409–11.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Chauke HL, Pattinson RC. Ward rounds -- bedside or conference room? S Afr Med J. 2006;96:398–400.PubMed Chauke HL, Pattinson RC. Ward rounds -- bedside or conference room? S Afr Med J. 2006;96:398–400.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29:21–43.PubMed Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29:21–43.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health services research. 2005;40:1918–30.CrossRef Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health services research. 2005;40:1918–30.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: development and validation using data from in-patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14:353–8.CrossRef Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: development and validation using data from in-patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14:353–8.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Thorlund K, Devereaux PJ, Wetterslev J, Guyatt G, Ioannidis JP, Thabane L, et al. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses? International journal of epidemiology. 2009;38:276–86.CrossRef Thorlund K, Devereaux PJ, Wetterslev J, Guyatt G, Ioannidis JP, Thabane L, et al. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses? International journal of epidemiology. 2009;38:276–86.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Gonzalo JD, Chuang CH, Huang G, Smith C. The return of bedside rounds: an educational intervention. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25:792–8.CrossRef Gonzalo JD, Chuang CH, Huang G, Smith C. The return of bedside rounds: an educational intervention. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25:792–8.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Janicik RW, Fletcher KE. Teaching at the bedside: a new model. Med Teach. 2003;25:127–30.CrossRef Janicik RW, Fletcher KE. Teaching at the bedside: a new model. Med Teach. 2003;25:127–30.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Landry MA, Lafrenaye S, Roy MC, Cyr C. A randomized, controlled trial of bedside versus conference-room case presentation in a pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatrics. 2007;120:275–80.CrossRef Landry MA, Lafrenaye S, Roy MC, Cyr C. A randomized, controlled trial of bedside versus conference-room case presentation in a pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatrics. 2007;120:275–80.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rogers HD, Carline JD, Paauw DS. Examination room presentations in general internal medicine clinic: patients’ and students’ perceptions. Acad Med. 2003;78:945–9.CrossRef Rogers HD, Carline JD, Paauw DS. Examination room presentations in general internal medicine clinic: patients’ and students’ perceptions. Acad Med. 2003;78:945–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Gonzalo JD, Heist BS, Duffy BL, Dyrbye L, Fagan MJ, Ferenchick G, et al. Identifying and overcoming the barriers to bedside rounds: a multicenter qualitative study. Acad Med. 2014;89:326–34.CrossRef Gonzalo JD, Heist BS, Duffy BL, Dyrbye L, Fagan MJ, Ferenchick G, et al. Identifying and overcoming the barriers to bedside rounds: a multicenter qualitative study. Acad Med. 2014;89:326–34.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Nair BR, Coughlan JL, Hensley MJ. Impediments to bed-side teaching. Med Educ. 1998;32:159–62.CrossRef Nair BR, Coughlan JL, Hensley MJ. Impediments to bed-side teaching. Med Educ. 1998;32:159–62.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Williams KN, Ramani S, Fraser B, Orlander JD. Improving bedside teaching: findings from a focus group study of learners. Acad Med. 2008;83:257–64.CrossRef Williams KN, Ramani S, Fraser B, Orlander JD. Improving bedside teaching: findings from a focus group study of learners. Acad Med. 2008;83:257–64.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effect of Bedside vs. Non-bedside Patient Case Presentation During Ward Rounds: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Authors
Martina Gamp, PhD
Christoph Becker, MD
Theresa Tondorf, M. Sc.
Seraina Hochstrasser, MD
Kerstin Metzger, MD
Gunther Meinlschmidt, PhD
Wolf Langewitz, MD
Rainer Schäfert, MD
Stefano Bassetti, MD
Sabina Hunziker, MD, MPH
Publication date
01-03-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Keyword
Care
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4714-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2019 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.