Download PDF
J Acad Ophthalmol 2014; 07(01): e013-e016
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1396087
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Scope, Focus, and Relevance of Ophthalmology Grand Rounds

Evan D. Schoenberg
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Tulane School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
,
John Heffernan
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Tulane School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
,
David Zeng
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Tulane School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
,
Ramesh S. Ayyala
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Tulane School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
23 December 2014 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose The aim of the study is to analyze the scope, focus, and educational relevance of resident grand presentations in relation to the community prevalence and impact of the diseases discussed.

Design This study is a retrospective review of grand rounds (GR) presentations at Tulane University School of Medicine's Department of Ophthalmology over a 3-year period.

Methods The topic of each GR presentation between 2009 and 2012 was categorized by subject matter, prevalence, and impact in a retrospective review of saved PowerPoint files and surgical videos.

Results Two hundred and eighty-four presentations were analyzed. Retina, glaucoma, cornea and external disease, and neuro-ophthalmology each comprised approximately one-sixth (17%) of topics discussed. Cataract and oculoplastics each comprised 9%, with the remaining cases distributed among other subjects. Sixty-five percent of discussed diseases were rare, while 19% were uncommon and 15% were common. Seventy-eight percent of diagnoses had impact on life (30%) or vision (48%). While diseases with minimal impact were distributed fairly evenly across prevalence categories, 64% of vision-threatening and 79% of life-threatening diseases were rare.

Conclusions Our cohort of residents spontaneously divided their topics across most subjects within ophthalmology fairly evenly. Rare diseases comprised a majority of the GR discussions, so the average GR session did not address diagnoses likely seen in an average clinic. However, these rare diseases were much more likely to be vision- or life threatening. Encouraging a greater emphasis on more commonly encountered pathology could improve GR's daily clinical relevance for resident education, but care must be taken to continue discussion of rare diseases of critical importance.

Keywords

grand rounds - resident education - clinical relevance
 

  • References

  • 1 Bogdonoff MD. A brief look at medical grand rounds. Pharos Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Med Soc 1982; 45 (1) 16-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hebert RS, Wright SM. Re-examining the value of medical grand rounds. Acad Med 2003; 78 (12) 1248-1252
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Van Hoof TJ, Monson RJ, Majdalany GT, Giannotti TE, Meehan TP. Improving medical grand rounds: recommendations. Conn Med 2009; 73 (10) 601-607
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mueller PS, Segovis CM, Litin SC, Habermann TM, Parrino TA. Current status of medical grand rounds in departments of medicine at US medical schools. Mayo Clin Proc 2006; 81 (3) 313-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar