Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Future Healthcare Journal

  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Future Healthcare Journal

futurehosp Logo
  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Using a checklist within simulation improves trainees' confidence on ward rounds

Grace ME Pearson, Sally E Wege, Sarah A Rosen, Daisy M Gaunt and Emily J Henderson
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/fhj.2021-0195
Future Healthc J July 2022
Grace ME Pearson
ABristol Medical School, Bristol, UK and honorary trust grade doctor, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
Roles: clinical research fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sally E Wege
BRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
Roles: clinical teaching fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sarah A Rosen
CRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
Roles: foundation year-2 doctor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daisy M Gaunt
DBristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
Roles: senior research associate
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily J Henderson
EBristol Medical School, Bristol, UK and honorary consultant geriatrician, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
Roles: consultant senior lecturer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

Ward rounds are integral to maintaining patient safety in everyday clinical care. Junior doctors are often expected to conduct independent rounds on graduation, but many feel ill-equipped to do so. We developed a safety checklist and simulation sessions to improve junior-led ward round practice at one district general hospital. We found that embedding a checklist within simulation is an effective way to teach ward round skills and increase confidence among undergraduate and postgraduate medical trainees.

KEYWORDS:
  • ward round
  • simulation
  • checklist
  • training

Introduction

Ward rounds are a cornerstone of hospital practice: crucial for improving patient safety, flow and satisfaction.1 Optimising ward rounds, following best practice guidance from the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), is a means of safeguarding quality of care and reducing costs.2

RCP reports have found that 69% of consultants do not lead a ward round every day; thus, the task regularly lies with junior doctors, 19% of whom reported ‘difficulty accessing senior clinician advice’.3,4 Another survey confirmed that 84% of juniors were conducting ward rounds alone on ≥2 days a week and many (89%) felt unprepared.5

Checklists can guide comprehensive ward round reviews, but their brevity means that they alone are unlikely to provide sufficient support for those who lack specific training.6 The RCP/RCN advocate supplementing checklists with simulation for training.2 Previous studies support this as an effective way to improve ward round skills and confidence.6–9

Our team of junior doctors and a supervising consultant physician developed a medical ward round checklist and simulation training package. This educational quality improvement project aimed to equip medical trainees with essential ward round skills and improve their confidence: engraining best practice early in their professional careers.10

Methods

A safety checklist was developed to facilitate comprehensive medical ward rounds at the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust (RUH), in line with the RCP/RCN guidance (Fig 1).2 Following its introduction in simulations at trust induction in August 2020, it was disseminated across all medical wards.

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Medical ward round checklist for use at the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust. The checklist was specifically designed to be eye-catching and easy to follow, including all the core aspects required for a comprehensive ward round assessment in a logical order. The content and design were reviewed and refined by three junior doctors of varying grades and one consultant physician until consensus was achieved.

The simulation was based on ward round scenarios commonly encountered in the authors' clinical practice, using authentic paper and electronic resources (an outline can be found in supplementary material S1). Learners were invited to conduct a ward round assessment to identify problem areas, then formulate and document a management plan within 30 minutes, reflective of real-life time pressures experienced as a junior doctor. They were also provided with the safety checklist as an aide memoire to support a structured and comprehensive approach. This training was delivered by two facilitators to small groups of new foundation year-1 (FY1) doctors at induction in August 2020, and then to fourth-year undergraduate medical students from the University of Bristol on clinical attachment at the RUH.

Learners were asked to self-report their confidence on a scale of 0–10, where 0 was the lowest level of confidence and 10 was the highest. Confidence, divided into confidence leading and confidence documenting a ward round, was measured before and after the simulation, as used in a similar study by Powell et al.6 Feedback on the simulation and checklist was also collected after each session. The data collected were ordinal, anonymous and not normally distributed. Therefore, we have described it using median and interquartile range (IQR), and unpaired analysis was performed using two-tailed Mann–Whitney U tests with a significance level of p<0.05.

Results

Training was delivered to a total of 56 learners: 34 FY1s and 22 students. The pooled analysis in Table 1 demonstrates that simulation incorporating a safety checklist improved confidence universally in both documenting and leading ward rounds across all groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Summary of self-rated confidence in documenting and leading a ward round

In the FY1s, median confidence in documenting a ward round increased following the simulation from 7/10 (IQR 6–7) to 8/10 (IQR 7–8), p=0.008. Likewise, median confidence in leading a ward round also increased considerably from 4/10 (IQR 2–5) to 7/10 (IQR 6–8), p<0.001. In the undergraduates, initial median confidence in contemporaneous documentation improved from 6/10 (IQR 5.3–7) to 8/10 (IQR 7–8) post-simulation, p=0.001. There was a substantial increase in undergraduates' median confidence leading a ward round from 3/10 (IQR 2–5) to 7/10 (IQR 5–7), p<0.001.

Table 1 demonstrates that, irrespective of whether learners were undergraduates or postgraduates, their confidence documenting ward rounds was consistently higher than their confidence leading, but the greatest increase observed was in confidence leading ward rounds. This is supported by pooled data, where median confidence documenting increased from 7/10 to 8/10 (p<0.001) and confidence leading increased from 4/10 to 7/10 (p<0.001), pre- and post-simulation. Furthermore, it is notable that pre-simulation confidence was consistently lower among students than FY1s.

In feedback, learners rated the training on average 4.8/5 stars (n=50), describing the session as ‘useful’ and ‘engaging’. They also rated the ward round checklist, giving it on average 4.6/5 stars (n=50).

Discussion

Our intervention was successfully delivered to undergraduates and postgraduates. Confidence pre-simulation was lower in undergraduates reflecting differing levels of experience and reinforcing a need for ward round teaching to be integrated into undergraduate medical education. Extending training inter-professionally will also be prudent.

Our intervention can be reproduced at a low cost, without specialist facilities, and the sessions themselves offer an opportunity for early-career clinicians to undertake peer-to-peer teaching. However, the organisation of larger groups may be more labour- and resource-intensive. Our small convenience sample resulted in unequal numbers of observations between groups. Use of a non-standard assessment tool has limited the extent to which we can determine whether the improvement seen was meaningful to learners. In future, we will consider consenting learners to link their pre- and post-simulation responses, to enable paired data analysis, and carefully select the tools used to evaluate the success of the intervention.

We acknowledge that there are weaknesses with using self-assessed confidence. Following on from the success of this training, we can expand its provision and scope. We are considering ways to implement independent assessment of documentation and simulation recordings. A qualitative evaluation would help us better understand ‘how’ and ‘why’ our intervention works; this could be undertaken in real time via ward round debriefing.

Conclusion

The ‘art’ of medical ward rounding encompasses a skillset that can and should be taught to maintain patient safety and support delivery of quality care. Our simulation-based training package is one way of educating junior doctors to discharge this duty effectively and with confidence.

Supplementary material

Additional supplementary material may be found in the online version of this article at www.rcpjournals.org/fhj:

S1 – Outline of scenarios and resources used in the ward round simulation.

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Dr Lesley Jordan (quality improvement lead, Royal United Hospital) and Mrs Ilana Llangdon (immediate former director of medical education, Royal United Hospital) for their assistance with this project. We would also like to thank all our willing participants from the Royal United Hospital and Bristol Medical School. This work was undertaken as part of a 3-year PhD fellowship awarded to Dr Grace Pearson, funded through a grant awarded to Dr Emily Henderson from The Dunhill Medical Trust (grant number OPCII-EF-2).

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2022 All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Baddeley R.
    Fixing the broken medical ward round is in everyone's interests. BMJ Opinion 2017. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2017/10/13/robin-baddeley-fixing-the-broken-medical-ward-round-is-in-everyones-interests [Accessed 19 May 2021].
  2. ↵
    1. Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Nursing
    . Modern ward rounds: Good practice for multidisciplinary inpatient review. RCP, 2021.
  3. ↵
    1. Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow
    . Focus on physicians: Census of consultant physicians and higher specialty trainees 2018. RCP, 2019.
  4. ↵
    1. Royal College of Physicians
    . Being a junior doctor: Experiences from the front line of the NHS. RCP, 2016. www.rcplondon.ac.uk/guidelines-policy/being-junior-doctor
  5. ↵
    1. Pearce J
    , Redman M, Gajebasia S, Dirksen R. Ward rounds: can an aide-memoire help new doctors? Clin Teach 2019;16:147–51.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Powell N
    , Bruce CG, Redfern O. Teaching a ‘good’ ward round. Clin Med 2015;15:135–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Pucher PH
    , Aggarwal R, Qurashi M, Singh P, Darzi A. Randomized clinical trial of the impact of surgical ward-care checklists on postoperative care in a simulated environment. Br J Surg 2014;101:1666–73.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Gee C
    , Morrissey N, Hook S. Departmental induction and the simulated surgical ward round. Clin Teach 2015;12:22–6.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Morgan J
    , Green V, Blair J. Using simulation to prepare for clinical practice. Clin Teach 2018;15:57–61.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Brazil V
    , Purdy EI, Bajaj K. Connecting simulation and quality improvement: how can healthcare simulation really improve patient care? BMJ Qual Saf 2019;28:862–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Using a checklist within simulation improves trainees' confidence on ward rounds
Grace ME Pearson, Sally E Wege, Sarah A Rosen, Daisy M Gaunt, Emily J Henderson
Future Healthc J Jul 2022, 9 (2) 171-173; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.2021-0195

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Using a checklist within simulation improves trainees' confidence on ward rounds
Grace ME Pearson, Sally E Wege, Sarah A Rosen, Daisy M Gaunt, Emily J Henderson
Future Healthc J Jul 2022, 9 (2) 171-173; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.2021-0195
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Supplementary material
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Improving stroke pathways using an adhesive ambulatory ECG patch: reducing time for patients to ECGs and subsequent results
Show more Short QI report

Similar Articles

FAQs

  • Difficulty logging in.

There is currently no login required to access the journals. Please go to the home page and simply click on the edition that you wish to read. If you are still unable to access the content you require, please let us know through the 'Contact us' page.

  • Can't find the CME questionnaire.

The read-only self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ) can be found after the CME section in each edition of Clinical Medicine. RCP members and fellows (using their login details for the main RCP website) are able to access the full SAQ with answers and are awarded 2 CPD points upon successful (8/10) completion from:  https://cme.rcplondon.ac.uk

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home

Other Services

  • Advertising
futurehosp Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians