Student personality type and preferred rounding methods in an internal medicine advanced pharmacy practice experience

Abstract

Background

Pharmacy students completing Internal Medicine rotations may be exposed to different stylistic approaches from providers on routine activities like patient rounds. This may be beneficial as students can learn in different ways. Conversely, extensive exposure to approaches that do not suit them may hinder student learning or lead students to feel they don't belong in a clinical setting.

Educational Activity

This study sought to assess how students of different personality types perceived benefits to their learning based on the rounding styles of two providers. One provider (Dr. Bedside) used a team-based, bedside rounding method with direct patient interaction, while the other (Dr. Table) used a tableside team-based discussion for each patient. In the final week of a 5-week Internal Medicine APPE rotation, a cohort of ten students completed a 12-item survey that collected details on two personality assessments and assessed perspectives of the two rounding styles.

Evaluation Findings

Ten students completed the personality assessments and survey. Students represented a diverse set of StrengthsFinder strengths and DOPE personality types, with the highest concentration (60%) of students receiving the Executing strength. All students agreed or strongly agreed that the exposure to two different rounding styles was valuable to their learning, with 80% of students preferring Dr. Bedside's approach.

Analysis of Educational Activity

Overall, no trends were identified between preference of rounding style and results from personality assessments, which indicates the current approach of exposing students to two rounding styles does not negatively impact certain learners based on DOPE and StrengthsFinders personality types.