The Teaching-Focused Round: Cultivating Clinical Reasoning in Trainees

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

The intensive care unit (ICU) represents one of the most challenging yet fertile environments for medical education. The complexity of critically ill patients, combined with the urgency of decision-making, creates unique opportunities for developing clinical reasoning skills. This review examines evidence-based approaches to structuring teaching-focused rounds that transform the ICU from merely a site of care delivery into a dynamic classroom. We present practical frameworks including the "One-Minute Differential," the "Why?" Round, anticipatory management questioning, and whiteboard teaching sessions, while emphasizing the cultivation of psychological safety and intellectual humility. These strategies aim to develop robust clinical reasoning patterns that will serve trainees throughout their careers in critical care medicine.

Keywords: Medical education, clinical reasoning, critical care, teaching rounds, diagnostic thinking, ICU education

Introduction

The traditional model of ICU rounds—moving patient to patient, reviewing overnight events, and making management decisions—often prioritizes efficiency over education. While patient care remains paramount, this approach frequently misses opportunities to explicitly develop the cognitive frameworks that distinguish expert from novice clinicians.Research demonstrates that clinical expertise develops through deliberate practice of diagnostic reasoning rather than mere exposure to cases, yet many training programs rely heavily on implicit learning.

The teaching-focused round represents a paradigm shift: intentionally structuring patient care discussions to make clinical reasoning visible, challengeable, and refinable. This approach recognizes that trainees learn not just from seeing what decisions are made, but from understanding why they are made and how expert clinicians think through uncertainty.Studies show that explicit instruction in diagnostic reasoning significantly improves trainee performance compared to traditional clinical exposure alone.

This review synthesizes evidence-based teaching strategies designed for the ICU environment, offering practical tools for educators who seek to maximize the educational value of daily rounds while maintaining clinical efficiency and patient safety.

The One-Minute Differential: Structured Approach to Diagnostic Reasoning

Rationale and Evidence Base

The ability to rapidly generate a comprehensive differential diagnosis represents a cornerstone of critical care competence. However, traditional teaching often focuses on the final diagnosis rather than the process of generating possibilities.Cognitive psychology research indicates that expert clinicians use both analytical and pattern-recognition approaches simultaneously, and trainees benefit from explicit practice in both modes.

The One-Minute Differential exercise forces trainees to articulate their thinking process under time constraints that mirror clinical reality. This approach addresses several cognitive challenges:

Premature closure: By requiring multiple diagnostic possibilities within 60 seconds, the exercise combats the tendency to fixate on a single diagnosis prematurely, a well-documented cognitive error in critical care.Studies of diagnostic errors reveal that premature closure accounts for approximately 30-40% of misdiagnoses in acute care settings.

Prioritization under pressure: The time constraint mimics the cognitive demands of actual resuscitation scenarios, building mental stamina and organizational skills.

Systematic thinking: Trainees develop frameworks (anatomical, physiological, or mnemonic-based) for comprehensively approaching new problems.

Implementation Strategy

Step 1: Problem selection. Choose a new clinical problem that has emerged overnight or during rounds—acute hypoxemia, altered mental status, or hemodynamic instability work particularly well.

Step 2: Frame the challenge. "Dr. Smith, you have 60 seconds. Give me your differential diagnosis for Mrs. Jones's new fever of 39°C on ICU day 3. Focus first on the life-threatening causes we cannot miss."

Step 3: Active listening. Allow the trainee to think aloud without interruption during their 60 seconds. This reveals their cognitive process.

Step 4: Structured feedback. After completion, acknowledge correct elements, then systematically review any missed categories: "You covered infectious causes well. Let's think about non-infectious causes of fever in the ICU—what about drug fever, VTE, or acalculous cholecystitis?"

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearl: Start with more junior trainees and progressively increase difficulty. A medical student might list three categories of causes; a senior resident should provide specific diagnoses within each category with probabilities.

Pearl: Use the "can't miss" framing consistently. This reinforces that the goal isn't encyclopedic recall but rather risk stratification—identifying immediately life-threatening conditions first.

Oyster: Watch for trainees who freeze or become anxious. If this occurs, offer a framework: "Let's use a systems-based approach—start with pulmonary causes, then cardiac, then..." This provides scaffolding while maintaining the learning opportunity.

Hack: Keep a running "differential checklist" for common ICU presentations posted in your workroom. This serves as both a learning tool and a cognitive aid during real emergencies.

The "Why?" Round: Making Clinical Reasoning Explicit

Theoretical Foundation

Anders Ericsson's research on deliberate practice emphasizes that expertise develops when learners receive immediate, specific feedback on their performance.In medical education, this translates to making the reasoning behind clinical decisions explicit rather than allowing trainees to observe decisions without understanding their basis.

The Socratic method of questioning—asking "Why?"—serves multiple educational purposes:

Exposes reasoning gaps: Trainees often know what to do from pattern recognition but cannot articulate why, indicating superficial rather than deep understanding.
Models expert thinking: When trainees struggle to answer "Why?", the attending's explanation demonstrates how experts approach the question.
Encourages evidence-based practice: The "Why?" question naturally leads to discussions of evidence, guidelines, and physiological principles.
Identifies knowledge gaps: Both the trainee and educator gain insight into what needs reinforcement.

Practical Application

The key to effective "Why?" rounds lies in asking about decisions trainees have actually made or recommended, not hypotheticals. This grounds the discussion in real clinical responsibility.

Examples in practice:

"Why did you choose vancomycin rather than linezolid for this MRSA pneumonia?"
"You've set the PEEP at 10 cm H₂O. Walk me through your reasoning. Why not 8? Why not 12?"
"You're targeting a MAP of 65 mmHg with vasopressors. Why that number for this specific patient?"
"You recommended continuing sedation. What's your goal Riker score, and why?"

Maintaining Psychological Safety

The "Why?" round risks creating anxiety if trainees perceive questions as punitive rather than educational. Several strategies preserve psychological safety:

Frame questions as collaborative exploration: "I'm curious about your thinking here..." rather than "Why did you do that?"

Acknowledge uncertainty: "This is a tough call. I want to hear your reasoning because there isn't always one right answer."

Share your own reasoning: "Here's why I might approach it differently..." demonstrates that multiple valid approaches exist.

Normalize "I don't know": When a trainee cannot answer, respond with "Great—let's look it up together right now." This models lifelong learning.

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearl: Limit "Why?" questions to 3-4 per round to avoid cognitive overload and maintain efficiency. Choose high-yield teaching moments.

Pearl: Occasionally ask yourself "Why?" aloud when making a decision, modeling metacognitive thinking: "I'm choosing norepinephrine over phenylephrine because this patient's cardiac output is 3.2 L/min—I need inotropy as well as vasoconstriction."

Oyster: Avoid asking "Why?" about decisions made by off-service teams unless educationally critical. This can undermine interdisciplinary relationships and create defensive rather than reflective thinking.

Hack: Create a "Why? Wednesday" or similar recurring theme, signaling to trainees that Wednesdays involve intensive Socratic questioning. This builds anticipation and psychological preparation.

The Anticipatory Management Question: Training for Instability

The Critical Care Imperative

Critical care differs from other medical specialties in the primacy of anticipation. Expert intensivists constantly run mental simulations: "If the ventilator-patient dyssynchrony worsens, I'll..." or "If this septic patient doesn't respond to fluids in one hour, my next step is..."Studies of crisis resource management demonstrate that teams who engage in prospective thinking perform better during actual emergencies.

Trainees, particularly those early in their ICU rotations, often operate reactively—responding to alarms and acute changes without having mentally rehearsed their response. The anticipatory management question transforms rounds into a cognitive rehearsal space.

Implementation Framework

Structure: Present a realistic clinical deterioration scenario based on the patient's current trajectory, then ask for a sequenced response.

Examples:

"This patient has severe ARDS on 80% FiO₂ and PEEP of 15. You're called in 2 hours because SpO₂ is 85% despite 100% FiO₂. What are your first three actions, in order?"
"Our cirrhotic patient with variceal bleeding has received 4 units PRBCs. If he has massive hematemesis in the next hour, walk me through your initial 10 minutes—who do you call, what do you order, what do you do first?"
"This post-op cardiac surgery patient has chest tube output of 300 mL/hour. If it suddenly increases to 500 mL in the next hour, what's your immediate management?"

Educational Value

This exercise develops several critical competencies:

Prioritization: Forcing trainees to sequence actions reveals whether they understand which interventions are time-critical versus those that can wait.

Resource awareness: Anticipatory questions prompt consideration of what resources (consultants, equipment, blood products) should be preemptively arranged.

Cognitive preparation: Mental rehearsal reduces cognitive load during actual emergencies, allowing faster, more effective responses.Simulation research demonstrates that mental practice improves both speed and accuracy of procedural performance.

Team communication: The exercise naturally incorporates discussions of whom to notify and how to activate help efficiently.

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearl: After trainees answer, narrate your own approach: "Here's what I would add: I'd have respiratory therapy at bedside before the deterioration because this patient's trajectory suggests it's more 'when' than 'if.'"

Pearl: Use these questions to highlight system-level preparations: "Should we have the bronchoscopy cart nearby? Should we notify anesthesia now that intubation may be difficult?"

Oyster: Avoid purely hypothetical scenarios unrelated to the actual patient's trajectory. This creates anxiety without practical benefit. The scenarios should represent realistic next steps in care.

Hack: Create an "anticipatory management checklist" for common ICU crisis scenarios (ARDS progression, variceal bleeding, cardiac arrest post-ROSC) that lives in your workroom or electronic resources.

The Whiteboard Teaching Session: Visualizing Physiology

The Power of Visual Learning

Complex physiological concepts—particularly those involving dynamic relationships and feedback loops—often exceed the capacity of verbal explanation alone.Educational psychology research demonstrates that combining verbal and visual information enhances retention and understanding, particularly for complex systems.

The ICU whiteboard serves as a real-time teaching canvas where abstract physiological principles become concrete, manipulable, and memorable.

High-Yield Topics for Whiteboard Teaching

Cardiovascular physiology:

Pressure-volume loops: Illustrating how preload, afterload, and contractility interact, particularly valuable when discussing shock states
Frank-Starling curves: Demonstrating why "fluid responsiveness" differs from "volume depletion"
Coronary perfusion pressure: Drawing the relationship between diastolic blood pressure, PEEP, and myocardial oxygen supply

Respiratory physiology:

West zones of the lung: Explaining optimal PEEP titration and V/Q matching
Pressure-time curves in ARDS: Illustrating lung-protective ventilation strategies
Oxygen cascade: From atmospheric to cellular, highlighting where interventions act

Renal and acid-base:

Stewart approach to acid-base: Drawing strong ion difference and its determinants
Kidney's response to shock: Illustrating autoregulation and why creatinine rises

Implementation Strategy

Timing: Dedicate 5-10 minutes during or immediately after rounds when a concept naturally arises from patient care.

Interactive approach: Draw the axes and labels, then hand the marker to a trainee: "Show me what happens to this loop when we give furosemide."

Connect to the bedside: Explicitly link the drawing to the patient: "This is why Mrs. Smith's cardiac output didn't improve when we gave fluids—she's operating on the flat part of her Frank-Starling curve."

Photograph and share: Take photos of particularly good teaching diagrams and share via email or messaging platforms, allowing trainees to review later.

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearl: Use different colors for different concepts (e.g., blue for volume-related changes, red for contractility) to enhance visual learning.

Pearl: Keep diagrams simple initially. Complexity can be layered: "Now let's add afterload to this diagram..."

Pearl: Archive your whiteboard photos into a "greatest hits" collection that new trainees can access, creating a longitudinal curriculum.

Oyster: Don't let whiteboard sessions extend beyond 10 minutes unless during a dedicated didactic time. The goal is focused, just-in-time teaching, not formal lectures.

Hack: Invest in a small portable whiteboard (2'×3') that can be carried to the workroom or conference room, making spontaneous teaching more feasible.

Fostering a "Safe-to-Say-I-Don't-Know" Culture

The Hidden Curriculum Problem

Despite explicit emphasis on evidence-based practice and lifelong learning, medical training's hidden curriculum often punishes admission of ignorance. Trainees learn implicitly that saying "I don't know" demonstrates weakness rather than appropriate intellectual humility.Research on medical errors reveals that unwillingness to acknowledge knowledge gaps contributes significantly to preventable adverse events.

The most impactful educational intervention in critical care may be creating a culture where "I don't know" becomes a respected starting point for learning rather than an endpoint signaling failure.

Strategies for Culture Change

Model uncertainty: Attending physicians must regularly vocalize their own uncertainty: "I'm not sure whether albumin or crystalloid is better in this specific scenario. Let's look at the recent literature."

Praise the admission: When trainees say "I don't know," respond with explicit positive reinforcement: "Excellent—knowing the boundaries of your knowledge is a sign of maturity. Let's figure this out together."

Real-time evidence searching: Normalize looking up information during rounds using smartphones or computers. Demonstrate effective search strategies: "I'm going to check UpToDate for the dosing... Here's what PubMed says about this specific scenario..."

Distinguish knowledge types: Help trainees differentiate between "core knowledge I should have learned" and "emerging evidence no one can be expected to know." This prevents demoralization.

The "I Don't Know" Round

Consider implementing a weekly "I Don't Know" round where the team explicitly addresses questions that arose during the week without immediate answers:

"On Monday, we couldn't remember the timing of tracheostomy in ARDS. Here's what we found..."
"Dr. Lee asked whether we should use hydrocortisone in this COVID patient. The latest evidence shows..."

This formalizes the process of identifying and filling knowledge gaps, demonstrating that ongoing learning is expected and valued.

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearl: Share stories of consequential errors that occurred when someone (perhaps yourself) didn't admit uncertainty. This powerfully illustrates why intellectual humility matters.

Pearl: Create a "Question of the Day" tradition where trainees submit questions they encountered, and the team addresses one daily. This validates curiosity.

Oyster: Be careful not to excuse lack of preparation under the guise of uncertainty. There's a difference between "I don't know because I didn't read about this patient's condition" and "I don't know because this is controversial or emerging evidence."

Hack: Establish a shared document (Google Doc, wiki, or departmental resource) where teams log "Questions We've Answered" with brief summaries and references. This creates institutional knowledge and prevents repeatedly researching the same questions.

Practical Considerations: Balancing Education and Efficiency

Time Management

Teaching-focused rounds inevitably require more time than checklist-driven rounds. However, strategic implementation can minimize this burden:

Select teaching moments: Not every patient requires intensive teaching. Choose 2-3 high-yield teaching opportunities per round.

Prep trainees: Give advance notice of teaching topics: "Tomorrow I want to discuss mechanical ventilation modes in detail when we see Mr. Johnson." This allows preparation and more efficient discussion.

Protect time: Explicitly budget 60-90 minutes for a 10-patient teaching round versus 45-60 minutes for a non-teaching round.

Split rounds: Consider separating "work rounds" (decision-making and order entry) from "teaching rounds" (educational discussion), meeting twice if necessary.

Assessment and Feedback

Teaching-focused rounds naturally generate assessment data, but this should be formalized:

Direct observation: Document specific instances of clinical reasoning, knowledge application, and professional behaviors observed during rounds.

Immediate feedback: Provide brief, specific feedback during or immediately after teaching interactions: "Your differential was comprehensive, but I want you to work on articulating your most likely diagnosis first, then alternatives."

Longitudinal tracking: Note which trainees consistently struggle with specific aspects (generating differentials, explaining reasoning, anticipating problems) to target remediation.

Adapting to Learner Level

The teaching-focused round must scale to learner sophistication:

Medical students: Focus on pattern recognition, basic physiology, and systematic approaches. Expect supported reasoning with guidance.

Junior residents: Emphasize evidence-based decision making, anticipatory management, and deeper physiological understanding. Expect increasingly independent reasoning.

Senior residents/fellows: Challenge with atypical presentations, management controversies, and leadership scenarios. Expect expert-level reasoning with nuanced understanding of evidence quality.

Measuring Educational Outcomes

Individual Assessments

While the teaching-focused round aims to develop global clinical reasoning, specific outcomes can be measured:

Diagnostic accuracy: Track trainees' diagnostic accuracy for new problems over time.

Reasoning quality: Use validated assessment tools like the Diagnostic Thinking Inventory or Script Concordance Tests.

Self-awareness: Assess whether trainees' confidence correlates appropriately with their actual performance (calibration).

Program-Level Metrics

Board examination performance: Programs emphasizing structured teaching rounds may see improved in-training examination scores.

Clinical outcomes: Though confounded by many variables, programs can track whether intensified educational focus maintains or improves patient outcomes.

Trainee satisfaction: Survey trainees about the educational value of rounds and their preparedness for independent practice.

Conclusion

The teaching-focused round represents more than a set of educational techniques—it embodies a philosophy that views patient care and education as synergistic rather than competing priorities. By implementing structured approaches like the One-Minute Differential, the "Why?" Round, anticipatory management questions, and whiteboard teaching sessions, educators transform the ICU into a robust learning environment. Most critically, fostering a culture of psychological safety and intellectual humility creates self-directed learners capable of navigating medicine's evolving knowledge landscape long after their training concludes.

The intensivist who masters these teaching strategies fulfills the dual mandate of critical care medicine: delivering exceptional patient care while cultivating the next generation of expert clinicians. In doing so, the impact extends far beyond individual patients to influence the thousands of future patients who will benefit from rigorously trained critical care physicians.

References

Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):988-994.
Rencic J, Trowbridge RL Jr, Fagan M, Szauter K, Durning S. Clinical reasoning education at US medical schools: results from a national survey of internal medicine clerkship directors. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(11):1242-1246.
Norman G. Research in clinical reasoning: past history and current trends. Med Educ. 2005;39(4):418-427.
Graber ML, Franklin N, Gordon R. Diagnostic error in internal medicine. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(13):1493-1499.
Pusic MV, Boutis K, Hatala R, Cook DA. Learning curves in health professions education. Acad Med. 2015;90(8):1034-1042.
Gaba DM, Howard SK, Fish KJ, Smith BE, Sowb YA. Simulation-based training in anesthesia crisis resource management (ACRM): a decade of experience. Simul Gaming. 2001;32(2):175-193.
Stefanidis D, Korndorffer JR Jr, Sierra R, Touchard C, Dunne JB, Scott DJ. Skill retention following proficiency-based laparoscopic simulator training. Surgery. 2005;138(2):165-170.
Mayer RE, Moreno R. Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educ Psychol. 2003;38(1):43-52.
Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.
ten Cate O, Durning SJ. Dimensions and psychology of peer teaching in medical education. Med Teach. 2007;29(6):546-552.

Disclosure: The author reports no conflicts of interest.

Word Count: 2,497 words

Thursday, October 30, 2025