Abstract Details

Bedside rounding (BR) has historically been an integral part of physician training. Recently, implementation of the electronic medical record and pressure for productivity have made table rounding (TR) popular. However, there is concern that table rounding is less educational.

To determine attending and trainee perspectives on the educational value and efficiency of bedside versus table rounding.

This is a prospective study of attending and trainee views on bedside versus table rounding completed on two Neurology teaching services at Indiana University Methodist Hospital. Teams included a neurology PGY2 and attending; other team members varied and included neurology PGY4s, off-service residents and medical students. Teams were instructed to bedside round during one week and table round during the other week. All participants received a survey prior to starting the study and after each week. The duration of rounds and patient census were recorded daily.

Seven attendings, 7 residents and 7 medical students were surveyed. Thirteen participants responded to the pre-trial survey, 9 to the post-TR survey and 9 to the post-BR survey. Prior to the trial, 61.5% of respondents stated BR was slightly efficient while 76.9% stated TR was very efficient. Additionally, 76.9% of respondents believed BR was very educational while 46.2% believed TR was very educational. Though 76.9% of participants indicated BR is more educational, 76.9% prefer TR. Post-study surveys indicate 80% of trainees would often table round in their own practice while 16.7% would often bedside round. Table rounds required less time per patient than bedside rounds (10.7 minutes, [SD 3.29] vs. 13.4 minutes [SD 4.96]).

Participants in our study found table rounding more efficient but less educational than bedside rounding. Though a majority found bedside rounding to be more educational, most preferred table rounding. Future study with larger sample size and improved survey response rates is warranted.