The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Competency in Cardiac Examination Skills in Medical Students, Trainees, Physicians, and Faculty: A Multicenter Study
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac examination is an essential aspect of the physical examination. Previous studies have shown poor diagnostic accuracy, but most used audio recordings, precluding correlation with visible observations. The training spectrum from medical students (MSs) to faculty has not been tested, to our knowledge. METHODS: A validated 50-question, computer-based test was used to assess 4 aspects of cardiac examination competency: (1) cardiac physiology knowledge, (2) auditory skills, (3) visual skills, and (4) integration of auditory and visual skills using computer graphic animations and virtual patient examinations (actual patients filmed at the bedside). We tested 860 participants: 318 MSs, 289 residents (225 internal medicine and 64 family medicine), 85 cardiology fellows, 131 physicians (50 full-time faculty, 12 volunteer clinical faculty, and 69 private practitioners), and 37 others. RESULTS: Mean scores improved from MS1-2 to MS3-4 (P = .003) but did not improve or differ significantly among MS3, MS4, internal medicine residents, family medicine residents, full-time faculty, volunteer clinical faculty, and private practitioners. Only cardiology fellows tested significantly better (P<.001), and they were the best in all 4 subcategories of competency, whereas MS1-2 were the worst in the auditory and visual subcategories. Participants demonstrated low specificity for systolic murmurs (0.35) and low sensitivity for diastolic murmurs (0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac examination skills do not improve after MS3 and may decline after years in practice, which has important implications for medical decision making, patient safety, cost-effective care, and continuing medical education. Improvement in cardiac examination competency will require training in simultaneous audio and visual examination in faculty and trainees.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Cardiac Auscultation: Rediscovering the Lost Art
Chizner, M. A. (2008) · Current Problems in Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2008.03.003 · Cited by 144
Hauer, K. E., Holmboe, E. S., & Kogan, J. R. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2010.507710 · Cited by 118
Yhdego, H., Kidane, N., Mckenzie, F., & Audette, M. (2023) · SIMULATION · doi:10.1177/00375497231165049 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Vukanovic-Criley, J. M., Criley, S., Warde, C. M., Boker, J. R., Guevara-Matheus, L., Churchill, W. H., Nelson, W. P., & Criley, J. M.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-03-27
- Volume
- 166
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 610
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2003574589
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.