You: Of course! BTW do you know the hx of Serratia? No? Well let me tell you about Operation Sea-Spray…
⌛️
Them: ...So should we start abx? Which one?
You: 😳
This week:
2/ So far @JenniferSpicer4 & I have explored consultant skills pertaining to the consult "ask".
We'll now focus on how to respond to the ask, verbally & through notes.
Let's start w/ a poll of those of you who CALL consults:
What is your PREFERRED way to receive consult recs?
3/ Previous studies suggest that verbal communication of consultant recs – especially initial recs - is preferred by most clinicians.
Additionally, lack of in-person interaction w/ consultants is one factor hospitalists identify as negatively impacting learning & patient care.
4/ Clearly, verbal communication is key. But I’m certain that we’ve all had experiences when verbal communication of recs went poorly.
(Don’t worry, #IDTwitter, I still love talking about Operation Sea-Spray! 🌉 🛥️ 🎈 🦠)
So, how can we get better at this skill intentionally?
5/ Let’s approach this w/ the frame of that tried-and-true #MedEd question: Where is the learner? (the person receiving the recs)
Think about WHERE in 3 domains:
1⃣ Where…in time/space (aka context)
2⃣ Where…in terms of prior knowledge
3⃣ Where…regarding the consult "ask"
6/ Each domain influences HOW to deliver verbal recommendations.
1⃣ THEIR context shapes the CONCISENESS of your recs.
Keep it brief & to the point if the listener is:
🕟 At the end of their day/shift
📞 On the phone
🧠 Rounding, prepping for the OR, multitasking, etc.
7/ Establishing their context may seem obvious, but is often overshadowed by OUR agenda as consultants.
Sometimes this means…
🌟 Deferring the less urgent recommendations to another time or day
🌟 Saving the waxing poetic for the note
🌟 Making a plan to teach later
8/ 2⃣ THEIR prior knowledge shapes how you FRAME the discussion & recs.
If what they know is limited:
☑️ Restate the "ask" (orient them)
☑️ PROVIDE a thought process
If what they know is rich:
✅ Clarify the "ask" (orient yourself)
✅ ADD to their thought process
9/ Here are some ways to establish the learner’s level of knowledge about the problem & patient.
Guiding principles:
💡 Don’t make assumptions (don’t we grumble when we hear “this patient is known to your service”?)
💡 Don’t probe the learner, probe their learning environment
10/ Finally, 3⃣ THEIR perspective on the consult “ask” shapes your PITCH.
If you sense that they...
🤝 Are already thinking what you recommend ➡️ be empathic & affirming
🤷 Are deferring to what you think ➡️ be directive
🤔 Will disagree with you ➡️ be curious & collaborative
11/ We'll explore this last element more fully in a future thread on navigating consult conflict.
For now, let's introduce a basic strategy for initiating & calibrating the "pitch".
I always lead w/ some version of “Tell us what your team thinks about…[the case, the dilemma]"
12/ This simple question helps set up the “emotional valence” of the recommendations as you deliver them.
Here’s an example from a common encounter between ID and primary teams.
13/ With experience, recognizing the primary team’s perspective on the consult “ask” becomes easier.
This may be based on:
*⃣ The consult "type" requested
*⃣ The "ask" itself
*⃣ The team/person making the "ask"
*⃣ The interpersonal dynamic when delivering recs
14/ This means experienced consultants adjust their communication style intuitively and on-the-fly.
But this may NOT be intuitive to learners on consult teams whose only previous perspective was that OF a primary team.
So how do we teach this?
15/ In this figure I've summarized strategies I've found helpful.
Big picture goals:
1⃣ Reinforce communication skills that build trust & cultivate a positive consult culture
2⃣ Develop skills in the “art of persuasion”
3⃣ Empower learners to be the team representative
16/ A recap.
In this 🧵 we learned:
🌟 Verbal recs are 🗝️ to better teaching/engagement by & w/ consultants
🌟 A “Where is the learner?” framework helps us think through HOW to give verbal recs
🌟 We can build consult communication skills intentionally w/ specific strategies
17/ Next week @JenniferSpicer4 will continue this series on “Teaching Consultant Skills,” w/ “Writing Notes.”
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.