6/ Given this prevailing wisdom, there are many frameworks to help improve the consult request & ALL of them emphasize having a “good” question.
They also all target the team REQUESTING the consult.
But what about the team RECEIVING the consult?
7/ For consultants, our contribution to this interaction often goes: “so…what’s your QUESTION?”
Try asking this WITHOUT it coming across as annoyed. (H/T to @jen_babik)
Indeed, despite our best intentions, the primary team may perceive this question VERY differently.
8/ Instead of fixating on a specific consult “question” upfront – which may prematurely narrow the scope of our input – a lower stakes & more achievable goal is simply to establish the consult “type”.
Here’s a framework adapted from how I discuss this with our fellows.
9/ Now, I hear the naysayers already.
How will they learn to ask “good questions”?
How will I know what I’m being asked to do?
But maybe I really DON’T need to do a full consult?
All fair points.
But, is the consult request phone call really the optimal time to address them?
10/ The consult question IS an important framing device. But, harping on it can convey hesitance & be counterproductive.
What can we say to keep things more open-ended?
🌟 How can we help?
🌟 What’s worrying you?
And we can always clarify the "ask" AFTER seeing the patient!
11/ Let’s pivot to the “social” aspects of the consult request interaction.
The CONTEXT of the consult process (time/workload pressures) underlies most of what we call “pushback”.
@gradydoctor captured this perfectly in this thread
12/ These contextual factors can translate into explicit or implicit disagreement about the need (“appropriateness”), urgency, sophistication, or “interestingness” of the consult request. This is “pushback”.
How do we mitigate this?
The interpersonal dynamic is key.
13/ In semi-structured interviews w/ physicians in EM/IM/surgery, Chan et al (2014) identified conflict-mitigating & exacerbating factors in the referral-consultation dynamic (see table).
Consultants don’t push back when they know the caller, empathize w/ their dilemma, & perceive equal engagement in the problem, no matter what it is.
The challenge is time.
How do we cultivate all this in a brief phone call?
15/ Some strategies:
1⃣ Frame the callback by accepting the consult – negotiate about WHEN you'll see the patient, not IF
2⃣ Convey empathy – acknowledge the clinical dilemma, no matter what it is
3⃣ Express humility/curiosity – the consult is often not what you think it is
16/ This seems easy. BUT:
Have I had less than ideal initial consult interactions? For sure.
Have I given “pushback”? Sad to say, but yes.
Have I let “context” best me? Many times.
Do I think receiving consults effectively is a skill I can intentionally develop/improve? YES!
17/ To recap:
The initial consult interaction has important cognitive & social elements, & its success depends on inputs from both sides.
In this thread I’ve outlined strategies to help consultants/specialty trainees be a bit more “meta” about this routine aspect of our work.
18/ Next week @JenniferSpicer4 will continue this series on “Teaching Consultant Skills,” with “Effective Data Gathering.”
2/ If you’re a clinical teacher in a subspecialty & wanted to incorporate pearls from #TweetorialTuesday, you've probably said to yourself (like I did):
WHEN? My days have ZERO predictability
WHAT? My learners are all at a VERY different place
WHO? My team seems to change QOD
3/ In this series @JenniferSpicer4 and I will share strategies for YOU, focusing on teaching as a [sub]specialist.
Our scope:
🌟 Teaching as an inpatient CONSULTANT
🌟 Teaching the CONSULT team (team hoping to provide help)
🌟 Teaching the PRIMARY team (team asking for help)
A standard refrain for subspecialists, but one that often generates significant stress on both ends of the call.
Why?
Q: If you have ever felt anxiety about calling a consult, what was the cause of most of your stress?
2/ Consultation is an indispensable component of medical practice – the field is too vast and new science emerges too rapidly for any one specialty to stay current.
Thus, collegial and effective consultation is essential.
3/ Until recently, most ideas to improve ‘effectiveness’ of consultation focused on ‘mechanics’ & ‘culture’ – timeliness, communication, and professionalism – like the classic “10 Commandments of Effective Consultation”.
@rabihmgeha shared a fantastic approach to positive BCx! I use a similar schema, but add ‘Questions to ask the lab/what to do next?’ since #ID usually doesn’t get the ‘critical result’ call from micro, and I want to empower those who do with actionable knowledge.
2/
I arrange the potential Gram stain results that one can be called w/ as follows: Gram(+) cocci, Gram(+) rods, Gram(–) rods, Gram(–) cocci, yeast. Gram(+) cocci are grouped by ‘morphology’ since the lab usually tells you this: clusters, pairs, chains, etc. Fill in with orgs.
3/
Like @rabihmgeha's schema, the orgs are deliberately ordered this way: Gram(+) orgs are often [skin] contaminants, Gram(–) orgs & yeast are not. Remember that clinician adjudication is the ‘gold standard’ for deciding what is a contaminant!
Hello everyone! I’ve been inspired by #MedEd colleague @JenniferSpicer4 to make my foray into #IDTwitter. I’m jumping right in with a #Tweetorial that combines my curiosity for the language of medicine and passion for powerful visuals and teaching about antibiotics!
2/
I’ve always been intrigued by how we describe abx decisions – ‘narrow’, ‘broaden’, ‘expand’, ‘[de]escalate’, etc. For my UME micro course, I made a figure that captures this terminology and lets learners compare/contrast spectra of activity visually.
Let’s build it together.
3/
Let’s start with a horizontal bar that represents the spectrum of clinically important bacteria. We will represent antibiotics above that spectrum with another horizontal bar.