Skip to main content

Teaching Rounds: Speaking Up, Getting Involved, and Learning to Accept Uncertainty

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Presenting Your Case
  • 686 Accesses

Abstract

Teaching rounds can be an intensive and highly productive learning experience for medical students. Participating in care discussions, asking questions, and engaging enthusiastically in Socratic dialogues with the attending are excellent ways for students to get involved in rounds and enhance learning for all. Teaching rounds is where students learn to treat pain and anxiety, advocate for their patients, discuss the big picture, and generally begin to understand the art of medicine. Because they are inexperienced and prone to be cautious, medical students often struggle with clinical decision-making. Intolerance of uncertainty and need for cognitive closure can increase stress and make decisions more difficult for both students and physicians. Explicit discussion on rounds of the need for decisiveness in the face of diagnostic uncertainty can help students to understand and accept the probabilistic nature of clinical decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baumgartner F. Human medicine versus techno-medicine. Tex Heart Inst J. 2009;36(3):268–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. McGee S. Bedside teaching rounds reconsidered. JAMA. 2014;311(19):1971–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cornia PB. How to teach at the bedside. In: Mookherjee S, Cosgrove EM, editors. Handbook of clinical teaching. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 86.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gheorghiade M, Abraham WT, Albert NM, Gattis Stough W, Greenberg BH, O’Connor CM, et al. Relationship between admission serum sodium concentration and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for heart failure: an analysis from the OPTIMIZE-HF registry. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(8):980–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Phipatanakul W, Adkinson NF. Cross-reactivity between sulfonamides and loop or thiazide diuretics: is it a theoretical or actual risk? Allergy Clin Immunol Int. 2000;12(1):26–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Fasugba O, Gardner A, Mitchell BG, Mnatzaganian G. Ciprofloxacin resistance in community- and hospital-acquired Escherichia coli urinary tract infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMC Infect Dis. 2015;15:545.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Schiel J, Wepfer A. Distributional aspects of endemic goiter in the United States. Econ Geogr. 1976;52(2):116–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Arnold SV, Reynolds MR, Lei Y, Magnuson EA, Kirtane AJ, Kodali SK, et al. Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER Trial. Circulation. 2014;129(25):2682–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Iannello P, Mottini A, Tirelli S, Riva S, Antonietti A. Ambiguity and uncertainty tolerance, need for cognition, and their association with stress. A study among Italian practicing physicians. Med Educ Online. 2017;22(1):1270009.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Caulfield M, Andolsek K, Grbic D, Roskovensky L. Ambiguity tolerance of students matriculating to U.S. Medical schools. Acad Med. 2014;89(11):1526–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Eley DS, Leung JK, Campbell N, Cloninger CR. Tolerance of ambiguity, perfectionism and resilience are associated with personality profiles of medical students oriented to rural practice. Med Teach. 2017;39(5):512–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Han PKJ, Schupack D, Daggett S, Holt CT, Strout TD. Temporal changes in tolerance of uncertainty among medical students: insights from an exploratory study. Med Educ Online. 2015;20:28285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schor R, Pilpel D, Benbassat J. Tolerance of uncertainty of medical students and practicing physicians. Med Care. 2000;38(3):272–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fagerström A, Miettinen P, Valtola J, Juvonen P, Tarvainen R, Ilves I, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with acute non-specific abdominal pain compared to acute appendicitis: prospective symptom audit after two decades. Acta Chir Belg. 2014;114(1):46–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Packer, C.D. (2019). Teaching Rounds: Speaking Up, Getting Involved, and Learning to Accept Uncertainty. In: Presenting Your Case. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13792-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13792-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13791-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13792-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics