Volume 19, Issue 4 p. 291-296
BRIEF REPORT

“Can you help me think this through?” How pediatric hospitalists learn from informal peer consultation

Laura B. O'Neill MD, Med

Corresponding Author

Laura B. O'Neill MD, Med

Children's National Hospital, Division of Hospital Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

Correspondence Laura B. O'Neill, MD, Med, Children's National Hospital, 111 Michigan Ave NW, Suite M-4800, Attn: Tawanda Price, Washington, DC 20010, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Priti Bhansali MD, Med

Priti Bhansali MD, Med

Children's National Hospital, Division of Hospital Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Ellen Goldman EdD, MBA

Ellen Goldman EdD, MBA

Graduate School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 03 January 2024

Abstract

Informal peer consultation (IPC), also called curbside consultation, is a common practice in medicine. Research has shown that physicians use IPC but how this learning occurs during the process has not been studied. This basic qualitative study describes how pediatric hospitalists learn during IPC, framed by Kolb's (2015) Experiential Learning Theory of Growth and Development. Eleven pediatric hospitalists were interviewed. Deidentified transcripts were coded for key themes using inductive methods. The main prompt for informal peer consultation was the perception of uncertainty. Three themes describe the learning process: “Eliciting Perspectives,” “Thinking Aloud Together,” and “Experiencing Validation. A fourth theme, “Acknowledging Value,” described the importance of IPC for modeling how to manage uncertainty with patients' caregivers and medical trainees. By describing the learning process, the results have implications for physicians who engage in IPC and may inform faculty-level professional development initiatives to improve the IPC process.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare no conflict of interest.