• S Mangione, W P Burdick, and S J Peitzman.
• Department of Internal Medicine, Medical College of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
• Acad Emerg Med. 1995 Jul 1;2(7):622-9.

ObjectiveTo assess the proficiency of emergency medicine (EM) trainees in the recognition of physical findings pertinent to the care of the critically ill patient.MethodsFourteen medical students, 63 internal medicine (IM) residents, and 47 EM residents from three university-affiliated programs in Philadelphia were tested. Proficiency in physical diagnosis was assessed by a multimedia questionnaire targeting findings useful in emergencies or related to diseases frequently encountered in the ED. Attitudes toward diagnosis not based on technology, teaching practices of physical examination during EM training, and self-motivated learning of physical diagnosis also were assessed for all the EM trainees.ResultsWith the exception of ophthalmology, the EM trainees were never significantly better than the senior students or the IM residents. They were less proficient than the IM residents in cardiology, and not significantly different from the IM residents in all other areas. For no organ system tested, however, did they achieve less than a 42.9% error rate (range: 42.9-72.3%, median = 54.8%). There was no significant improvement in proficiency over the three years of customary EM training. The EM residents who had received supervised teaching in physical diagnosis during training achieved a significantly higher cumulative score. The EM residents attributed great clinical importance to physical diagnosis and wished for more time devoted to its teaching.ConclusionsThese data confirm the recently reported deficiencies of physical diagnosis skills among physicians in training. The results are particularly disturbing because they relate to EM trainees and concern skills useful in the ED. Physical diagnosis should gain more attention in both medical schools and residency programs.

9 keywords...

hide…