1. Rounds and Rounds We Go: A New Era in the Delivery of Weekly Grand Rounds Jose Francois MD MMedEd CCFP FCFP

2. Conflict of Interest Disclosure José François MD MMedEd CCFP FCFP No personal receipt of Industry funding Not involved in any Industry funded research No participation on Industry supported advisory boards Directs a University CME Office which has received Industry funding for conferences it organizes

3. Objectives At the end of this session participants will be able to: Describe the ethical and educational standards required of accredited rounds programs Discuss strategies to incorporate the use of technology into rounds Explore approaches to facilitate the sharing of relevant content and programs across universities and national specialty societies Discuss the impact of copyright legislation on the distribution of Grand Rounds by electronic means

4. Current status of medical grand rounds in departments of medicine at US medical schools. Mueller PS, Segovis CM, Litin SC, Habermann TM, Parrino T Mayo Clin Proc. 2006 Mar;81(3):313-21 Survey of 133 departments of medicine at US medical schools performed from September 2003 to March 2004 Conclusion: Departments of medicine regard MGR as an important educational and social endeavor. However, most departments use suboptimal teaching, planning, and evaluation methods, and many rely on industry to pay for MGR. Addressing these concerns and other challenges may enhance the value of MGR

5. Mueller et al’s findings The most common format was the didactic lecture Case presentations were uncommonly used, and patients were rarely present. Only 44% of departments used educational needs assessments Only 13% assessed knowledge gained by attendees Feedback was irregularly provided to presenters. Most departments (64%) relied on industry to pay for MGR. Lack of presenter-attendee interaction and conflicting meetings were cited as important challenges

6. U of M experience Present situation Large volume of activity, much under appreciated Variation between departments

7. U of M experience Present situation Large volume of activity, much under appreciated Variation between departments Desired situation Valued educational activity High quality education

8. U of M experience Present situation Large volume of activity, much under appreciated Variation between departments Desired situation Valued educational activity High quality education Standardizing Training Innovating

9. U of M policy on RSS Educational Planning –Identification of learner needs –Determination of learning objectives –Selection of the educational format –Evaluation Management of commercial support Honoraria and reimbursement of expenses Disclosure and management of conflict of interest Annual reporting

10. Supporting RSS planners Faculty development Toolkit Feedback

11. Best Practices & Innovation Making round relevant through careful needs assessments Increasing interactivity Results in changes made in practice

12. How would you redesign rounds?

13. Questions? Comments …