Hayer Rupinder, Tang Joyce, Bisschops Julia, Schneider Gregory W, Kirley Kate, Khan Tamkeen, Rieger Erin, Walford Eric, Anderson Irsk, Press Valerie, Williams Brent
American Medical Association, Improving Health Outcomes, Chicago, IL, United States.
Section of Hospital Medicine, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
JMIR Med Educ. 2025 Jun 5;11:e66221. doi: 10.2196/66221.
The traditional history and physical (H&P) provides the basis for physicians' data gathering, problem formulation, and care planning, yet it can miss relevant behavioral or social risk factors. The American Medical Association's "H&P 360," a modified H&P, has been shown to foster information gathering and patient rapport in inpatient settings and objective structured clinical examinations. It prompts students to explore 7 domains, as appropriate to the clinical context: biomedical problems, psychosocial problems, patients' priorities and goals, behavioral history, relationships, living environment and resources, and functional status.
This study aims to examine the perceived usability of the H&P 360 outside standardized patient settings.
The H&P 360 was implemented in various clinical settings across 3 institutions. Of the 207 student participants, 18 were preclerkship, 126 were clerkship, and 63 were postclerkship; 3-8 months after implementation, we administered a student survey consisting of 14 Likert-type items (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree) and 3 free-text response items to assess usability.
Of the 207 students, 61 responded to the survey (response rate was 29.5%). Among all students, mean ratings on the 3 usability survey items ranged from 4.03 to 4.24. The 5 items assessing the impact on patient care had mean ratings ranging from 3.88 to 4.24. The mean ratings for the 2 student learning items were 4.10 and 4.16. Students' open-ended comments were generally positive, expressing a perceived value in obtaining a more complete contextual picture of patients' conditions and supporting the usability of the H&P 360. Survey response patterns varied across institutions and learner levels.
Our findings suggest that using the H&P 360 may enhance information gathering critical for chronic disease management, particularly regarding social drivers of health. As a potential new standard, the H&P 360 may have clinical usability for identifying and addressing health inequities. Future work should assess its effects on patient care and outcomes.
传统的病史与体格检查(H&P)为医生收集数据、提出问题及制定护理计划提供了基础,但它可能会遗漏相关的行为或社会风险因素。美国医学协会的“360度病史与体格检查(H&P 360)”是一种经过改进的H&P,已被证明在住院环境及客观结构化临床检查中有助于信息收集及医患关系的建立。它促使学生根据临床背景,酌情探索7个领域:生物医学问题、心理社会问题、患者的优先事项和目标、行为史、人际关系、生活环境与资源以及功能状态。
本研究旨在考察H&P 360在标准化患者环境之外的感知可用性。
H&P 360在3所机构的不同临床环境中实施。在207名参与研究的学生中,18名处于临床实习前阶段,126名处于临床实习阶段,63名处于临床实习后阶段;实施3至8个月后,我们对学生进行了一项调查,该调查包括14个李克特量表式项目(1=强烈不同意至5=强烈同意)和3个自由文本回答项目,以评估可用性。
207名学生中,61名对调查做出了回应(回应率为29.5%)。在所有学生中,3项可用性调查项目的平均评分在4.03至4.24之间。评估对患者护理影响的5个项目的平均评分在3.88至4.24之间。2个学生学习项目的平均评分分别为4.10和4.16。学生们的开放式评论总体上是积极的,他们表示在获取患者病情更完整的背景信息方面感受到了价值,并支持H&P 360的可用性。调查回应模式因机构和学习者水平而异。
我们的研究结果表明,使用H&P 360可能会加强对慢性病管理至关重要的信息收集,特别是关于健康的社会驱动因素方面。作为一种潜在的新标准,H&P 360在识别和解决健康不平等问题方面可能具有临床可用性。未来的工作应评估其对患者护理和结果的影响。