Table 2.
Respondents’ views on the general value and practice of physical examination
| Question | Correlation with PESM utility scale* | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q10. How valuable is physical examination in the assessment of general medical referrals? | Almost never valuable | Occasionally valuable | Frequently valuable | Almost always valuable | – | – |
| Acute referrals (n=2,647) | 0.6% | 4.3% | 25.5% | 69.7% | – | 0.306 |
| Outpatient referrals (n=2,522) | 1.0% | 15.5% | 39.8% | 43.8% | – | 0.371 |
| Q11. What proportion of medical referrals require physical examination of any sort? | 0–24% | 25–59% | 50–74% | 75–100% | – | – |
| Acute referrals (n=2,654) | 0.6% | 2.9% | 11.1% | 85.3% | – | 0.161 |
| Outpatient referrals (n=2,523) | 1.4% | 8.7% | 27.4% | 62.5% | – | 0.259 |
| Q12. What proportion of medical referrals require a traditional, comprehensive, systematic physical examination? | 0–24% | 25–59% | 50–74% | 75–100% | – | – |
| Acute referrals (n=2,652) | 7.2% | 13.6% | 29.9% | 49.3% | – | 0.319 |
| Outpatient referrals (n=2,518) | 12.4% | 22.5% | 34.8% | 30.3% | – | 0.412 |
| Q13. In comparison to the history, how valuable is physical examination in the assessment of general medical referrals? | Much less valuable | Slightly less valuable | About the same value | Slightly more valuable | Much more valuable | – |
| Acute referrals (n=2,656) | 7.4% | 20.6% | 39.3% | 14.4% | 18.2% | 0.354 |
| Outpatient referrals (n=2,525) | 13.2% | 26.3% | 35.2% | 11.9% | 13.4% | 0.398 |
| Q14. In your experience of acute post receiving ward rounds what proportion of patients are actually examined by the consultant or other senior clinical decision maker, other than by taking the pulse? (n=2,666) | 0–24% | 25–29% | 50–74% | 75–100% | ||
| 12.0% | 20.0% | 32.4% | 32.3% | – | 0.186 | |
| Q15. On how many occasions per week are the physical examination skills of the average FY/CMT level trainee directly observed by a consultant? (n=2,645) | 0 | 1–2 | 3–4 | 5–8 | >8 | |
| All respondents | 31.3% | 44.3% | 17% | 5.7% | 1.7% | 0.261 |
| Trainees | 66% | 28% | 5% | 1% | 0% | |
| Consultants | 27% | 51% | 17% | 5% | 1% | |
| Q16. On how many occasions per week does a consultant demonstrate their technique in any component of the physical examination to FY/CMT level trainees? (n=2,647) | 0 | 1–2 | 3–4 | 5–8 | >8 | |
| All respondents | 17.1% | 47.0% | 19.1% | 8.1% | 8.7% | 0.143 |
| Trainees | 31% | 47% | 9% | 6% | 7% | |
| Consultants | 8% | 44% | 20% | 11% | 17% | |
| Q17. How do the physical examination skills of current graduates from your own country of training compare with those of your own peer group at the point of graduation? (n=2,652) | Much poorer | A littler poorer | About the same | A little better | Much better | |
| 12.6% | 28.1% | 44.3% | 10.3% | 4.6% | 0.062 |
*All correlations significant at p<0.001
CMT = core medical trainee; FY = foundation trainee; PESM = physical examination signs or manouevres