Objectives

We sought to report medical student and faculty perceptions of the purpose and utility of questions on clinical rounds.

Methods

We developed and administered a survey to third and fourth-year medical students and teaching physicians. The survey elicited attitudes about using questions to teach on rounds in both benign and malignant learning environments.

Results

Ninety-seven percent of faculty and 85% of students predicted they will use questions to teach. Nine percent of students described learning-impairing stress during benign bedside teaching. Fifty-nine percent of faculty felt questions were mostly for teaching; 74% of students felt questions were mostly for evaluation. Forty-six percent of students felt questions underestimated their knowledge. Students felt questions were more effective for classroom teaching than bedside teaching. Faculty and students agreed that a malignant environment detrimentally affected learning and performance.

Conclusions

Students and faculty supported the use of questions to teach and evaluate, especially in benign teaching environments. Many students described stress severe enough to affect their learning and performance, even when questioned in benign teaching environments. Faculty underestimated the degree to which students experience stress-related learning impairment and the degree to which students see questions as evaluation rather than teaching. Nearly half of students felt that questions underestimated their own knowledge. Students feel more stress and less learning when questioned with a patient present. Faculty must realize that even in the best learning environment some students experience stress-impaired learning and performance, perhaps because of the conflict between learning and evaluation.

While prior noninvasive (e.g., electroencephalographic) studies suggest that the human primary motor cortex (M1) is active during gait processes, the limitations of noninvasive recordings make it impossible to determine whether M1 is involved in high-level motor control (e.g., obstacle avoidance, walking speed), low-level motor control (e.g., coordinated muscle activation), or only nonmotor processes (e.g., integrating/relaying sensory information). This study represents the first invasive electroneurophysiological characterization of the human leg M1 during walking. Two subjects with an electrocorticographic grid over the interhemispheric M1 area were recruited. Both exhibited generalized γ-band (40-200 Hz) synchronization across M1 during treadmill walking, as well as periodic γ-band changes within each stride (across multiple walking speeds). Additionally, these changes appeared to be of motor, rather than sensory, origin. However, M1 activity during walking shared few features with M1 activity during individual leg muscle movements, and was not highly correlated with lower limb trajectories on a single channel basis. These findings suggest that M1 primarily encodes high-level gait motor control (i.e., walking duration and speed) instead of the low-level patterns of leg muscle activation or movement trajectories. Therefore, M1 likely interacts with subcortical/spinal networks, which are responsible for low-level motor control, to produce normal human walking.