Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Medical Education

Date Submitted: Sep 16, 2024
Date Accepted: Mar 6, 2025

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Implementing the H&P 360 in Three Medical Institutions: Usability Study

Hayer R, Tang J, Bisschops J, Schneider G, Kirley K, Khan T, Rieger E, Walford E, Anderson I, Press V, Williams B

Implementing the H&P 360 in Three Medical Institutions: Usability Study

JMIR Med Educ 2025;11:e66221

DOI: 10.2196/66221

PMID: 40471655

PMCID: 12179563

Implementing the H&P 360 in Three Medical Institutions: Usability Study 

  • Rupinder Hayer; 
  • Joyce Tang; 
  • Julia Bisschops; 
  • Gregory Schneider; 
  • Kate Kirley; 
  • Tamkeen Khan; 
  • Erin Rieger; 
  • Eric Walford; 
  • Irsk Anderson; 
  • Valerie Press; 
  • Brent Williams

ABSTRACT

Background:

The traditional History and Physical (H&P) provides the basis for physicians’ data gathering, problem formulation, and care planning, yet can miss relevant behavioral or social drivers of health. The “H&P 360,” a modified H&P, has been shown to foster information gathering and patient rapport in inpatient and OSCE encounters. It prompts students to explore seven domains - biomedical problems; psychosocial problems; patients’ priorities and goals; behavioral history; relationships; living environment and resources; and functional status - as appropriate to the clinical context.

Objective:

The goal of this study was to examine the perceived utility of the H&P 360 outside of standardized patient setting.

Methods:

Three institutions implemented the H&P 360 in different clinical settings. Of the 207 student participants, 18 were pre-clerkship, 126 were clerkship, and 63 were post-clerkship. Three to eight months after implementation, we administered a student survey with 14 Likert-type (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree) and three free text-response items querying utility.

Results:

Overall student response rate was 30%. Among all students, mean ratings on the three utility survey items ranged from 4.03 to 4.24. The five impact on patient care items had mean ratings of 3.88 to 4.24. Mean ratings for the two student learning items were 4.10 and 4.16. Students’ open-ended comments were generally positive and expressed a perceived value in obtaining a more complete contextual picture of the patients’ conditions and support for the utility of the H&P 360. Survey response patterns varied across institutions and learner levels.

Conclusions:

Our findings show that utilizing the H&P 360 can promote information gathering critical for chronic disease management, especially around social drivers of health. As a new standard, the H&P 360 may have clinical utility for revealing and addressing health inequities. Future work should measure effects on patient care and outcomes. Clinical Trial: N/A


 Citation

Please cite as:

Hayer R, Tang J, Bisschops J, Schneider G, Kirley K, Khan T, Rieger E, Walford E, Anderson I, Press V, Williams B

Implementing the H&P 360 in Three Medical Institutions: Usability Study

JMIR Med Educ 2025;11:e66221

DOI: 10.2196/66221

PMID: 40471655

PMCID: 12179563

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.