This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background: With the recent emphasis on core competencies, medical schools and residency programs have attempted to monitor and regulate trainees’ patient encounters. The educational validity of this practice is unknown. Our objective was to determine whether patient encounter logs correlate with educational outcomes.
Methods: We reviewed patient logs of all 212 neurology clerkship students from the 2005–2006 academic year and determined the number of patients each student saw in five diagnostic categories (seizure, headache, stroke, acute mental status change, and dementia). We compared these numbers with the students’ written examination scores (total and category-specific) and clinical evaluation scores using Pearson product-moment correlations.
Results: The more patients in a given diagnostic category that students saw, the lower the students’ examination subscores in that disease category (r = −0.066, p = 0.03). The total number of patients each student saw did not correlate with the student’s total examination score (r = −0.021, p = 0.77) or the student’s overall clinical performance rating (r = 0.089, p = 0.23).
Conclusions: Higher numbers of logged patients did not correlate with better clerkship performance, whether the outcome measures were written tests or faculty ratings, and whether the analysis involved total or disease-specific patient counts. Thus, patient census may not be a meaningful index of educational experience or outcome. Considerable time, money, and effort are required to maintain accurate logs of trainees’ encounters with patients; based on the current study, this may be an inefficient use of resources.
IRB = Institutional Review Board; NBME = National Board of Medical Examiners; OSCE = Objective Structured Clinical Examination.
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
NOTE: All authors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.