All we know is still infinitely less than all that still remains unknown. William Harvey (1578–1657)
The focused history and physical examination constitute a modality that is important to master to explore a patient’s needs and to educate the patient within a short period. It is a great skill and takes time to master. Only after becoming comfortable and confident with the complete history and physical examination can the clinician master the focused history and physical examination, because it relies on extracting the components that are most relevant. It would be wonderful if clinicians were able to spend 45 minutes to 1 hour with each new patient, but time restraints generally allow the health care provider only about 10 to 15 minutes for each new patient encounter at most. Thus, taking a focused history and performing a focused physical examination are critical skills. It is extremely important to learn to become focused and efficient in documenting a medical history and in performing the physical examination, even though most medical schools do not teach these focused clinical skills. Always start with open-ended questions and determine why the patient sought medical attention today. At some point in the interview, it would be helpful to ask the patient, “What do you think is going on?” There may be conflict or hidden anxiety, and this question may help the patient to open up to the actual problem. Let the patient speak without interruption, if possible. Always avoid leading or biased questions. The focused history and physical examination is a complex activity comprising several different skills. It is, however, difficult to teach. Scientific knowledge must be integrated with excellent communication and hypothetical-deductive reasoning to produce a series of pertinent questions about the health of the patient. As discussed in Chapter 24, Diagnostic Reasoning in Physical Diagnosis, most of the time, the diagnosis is not clear-cut; the history is often not that of a 70-year-old man with a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia who presents with crushing chest pain, or that of a 43-year-old obese woman who presents with severe right upper quadrant pain radiating to her right shoulder and nausea. In most cases, there exists uncertainty as to the diagnosis, and the health-care provider must assess the relative chance that the patient is or is not suffering from a particular medical problem. There are elements of uncertainty in almost every case you will see. Despite the technology of the twenty-first century, physicians still must use their judgment when making clinical decisions. The hard part of practicing medicine lies in knowing when it is acceptable to be cost conscious with the use of further testing and when this technology must be used. Codifying the way in which health care providers logically approach medical problems and deal with uncertainty is a difficult task. Good medicine is playing the odds after having obtained the important data. The focused history starts with uncovering the major details of the current medical problem or the reason the patient has sought medical attention at this time. In documenting a focused history and performing a focused physical examination, you need to explore the chief complaint, the history of the present illness, the past medical history, medications and allergies, the family history and social history, the occupational history, and the sexual history that are relevant to that specific patient. It is important to recognize that focused does not mean making one diagnosis and skipping the differential diagnosis. In the focused physical examination, you need to examine specifically the body part or system directly involved with the medical problem when there is no time to perform a head-to-toe examination. Remember, however, that other organ systems may need to be evaluated as well. A patient with chest pain requires a full cardiac examination, in addition to examination of the legs for peripheral pulses and edema, carotid artery auscultation and palpation, evaluation of liver size, and evaluation of the retina for related vascular changes. After your clinical evaluation, tests should be obtained only to corroborate your clinical impression or if the result will in some way affect your decision-making. Remember that common things are common. Uncommon symptoms are more likely to represent an uncommon manifestation associated with a common condition than with a totally uncommon illness.
The written History and Physical (H&P) serves several purposes:
The H&P is not:
Knowing what to include and what to leave out will be largely dependent on experience and your understanding of illness and pathophysiology. If, for example, you were unaware that chest pain is commonly associated with coronary artery disease, you would be unlikely to mention other coronary risk-factors when writing the history. As you gain experience, your write-ups will become increasingly focused. You can accelerate the process by actively seeking feedback about all the H&Ps that you create as well as by reading those written by more experienced physicians. Several sample write-ups are presented at the end of this section to serve as reference standards. The core aspects of the H&P are described in detail below. Chief Concern (CC): "CC: Mr. Smith is a 70 year-old male admitted for the evaluation of increasing chest pain."History of Present Illness (HPI): The HPI should provide enough information to clearly understand the symptoms and events that lead to the admission. This covers everything that contributed to the patient's arrival in the ED (or the floor, if admission was arranged without an ED visit). Events which occurred after arrival can be covered in a summary paragraph that follows the pre-hospital history. A commonly used pneumonic to explore the core elements of the chief concerns is OLD CARTS, which includes: Onset, Location, Duration, Characteristics, Aggravating/Alleviating factors, Related symptoms, Treatments, and Significance. Some HPIs are rather straight forward. If, for example, you are describing the course of a truly otherwise healthy 40-year-old who presents with 3 days of cough, fever, and shortness of breath as might occur with pneumonia, you can focus on that time frame alone. Writing HPIs for patients with pre-existing illness(es) or a chronic, relapsing problems is a bit trickier. In such cases, it’s important to give enough relevant past history "up front," as having an awareness of this data will provide the contextual information that allows the reader to fully understand the acute issue. If, for example, a patient with a long history of coronary artery disease presents with chest pain and shortness of breath, an inclusive format would be as follows: "HIP: Mr. S is a 70 yr old male presenting with chest pain who has the following coronary artery disease related history: -Status Post 3 vessel CABG in 2008. -Suffered recurrent chest pain in December 2015, which ultimately lead to catheterization and stent placement in a mid-LAD lesion. -He was re-cathed in January 2017 for recurrent chest pain at rest; at that time there was no significant change compared to catheterization of 12/15. The patient was therefore continued on medical therapy. -Known to have an Ejection Fraction of 40% with inferior and lateral akinesis by echo in January 2018 -No prior episodes of heart failure. -Last Exercise Tolerance Test was performed in January of 2018 and showed no ischemia at 8 METS of activity. That's a rather complicated history. However, it is obviously of great importance to include all of the past cardiac information "up front" so that the reader can accurately interpret the patient's new symptom complex. The temporal aspects of the history are presented in an easy to follow fashion, starting with the most relevant distant event and then progressing step-wise to the present. From a purely mechanical standpoint, note that historical information can be presented as a list (in the case of Mr. S, this refers to his cardiac catheterizations and other related data). This format is easy to read and makes bytes of chronological information readily apparent to the reader. While this data is technically part of the patient's "Past Medical History," it would be inappropriate to not feature this prominently in the HPI. Without this knowledge, the reader would be significantly handicapped in their ability to understand the patient's current condition. Knowing which past medical events are relevant to the chief concern takes experience. In order to gain insight into what to include in the HPI, continually ask yourself, "If I was reading this, what historical information would I like to know?" Note also that the patient's baseline health status is described in some detail so that the level of impairment caused by their current problem is readily apparent. The remainder of the HPI is dedicated to the further description of the presenting concern. As the story teller, you are expected to put your own spin on the write-up. That is, the history is written with some bias. You will be directing the reader towards what you feel is/are the likely diagnoses by virtue of the way in which you tell the tale. If, for example, you believe that the patient's chest pain is of cardiac origin, you will highlight features that support this notion (e.g. chest pressure with activity, relieved with nitroglycerin, preponderance of coronary risk factors etc.). These comments are referred to as "pertinent positives." These details are factual and no important features have been omitted. The reader retains the ability to provide an alternative interpretation of the data if he/she wishes. A brief review of systems related to the current complaint is generally noted at the end of the HPI. This highlights "pertinent negatives" (i.e. symptoms which the patient does not have). If present, these symptoms might lead the reader to entertain alternative diagnoses. Their absence, then, lends support to the candidate diagnosis suggested in the HPI. More on the HPI can be found here: HPI. Occasionally, patients will present with two (or more) major, truly unrelated problems. When dealing with this type of situation, first spend extra time and effort assuring yourself that the symptoms are truly unconnected and worthy of addressing in the HPI. If so, present them as separate HPIs, each with its own paragraph. Past Medical History (PMH):This includes any illness (past or present) that the patient is known to have, ideally supported by objective data. Items which were noted in the HPI (e.g. the cardiac catheterization history mentioned previously) do not have to be re-stated. You may simply write "See above" in reference to these details. All other historical information should be listed. Important childhood illnesses and hospitalizations are also noted. Detailed descriptions are generally not required. If, for example, the patient has hypertension, it is acceptable to simply write "HTN" without providing an in-depth report of this problem (e.g. duration, all meds, etc.). Unless this has been a dominant problem, requiring extensive evaluation, as might occur in the setting of secondary hypertension. Also, get in the habit of looking for the data that supports each diagnosis that the patient is purported to have. It is not uncommon for misinformation to be perpetuated when past write-ups or notes are used as the template for new H&Ps. When this occurs, a patient may be tagged with (and perhaps even treated for) an illness which they do not have! For example, many patients are noted to have Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). This is, in fact, a rather common diagnosis but one which can only be made on the basis of Pulmonary Function Tests (PFTs). While a Chest X-Ray and smoking history offer important supporting data, they are not diagnostic. Thus, "COPD" can repeatedly appear under a patient's PMH on the basis of undifferentiated shortness of breath coupled with a suggestive CXR and known smoking history, despite the fact that they have never had PFTs. So, maintain a healthy dose of skepticism when reviewing notes and get in the habit of verifying critical primary data. Past Surgical History (PSH): All past surgeries should be listed, along with the rough date when they occurred. Include any major traumas as well. Medications (MEDS): Includes all currently prescribed medications as well as over the counter and non-traditional therapies. Dosage, frequency and adherence should be noted. Allergies/Reactions (All/RXNs): Identify the specific reaction that occurred with each medication. Social History (SH):
Family History (FH): Obstetrical History (where appropriate): Included the number of pregnancies, live births, duration of pregnancies, complications. As appropriate, spontaneous and/or therapeutic abortions. Birth control (if appropriate). Review of Systems (ROS): As mentioned previously, many of the most important ROS questions (i.e. pertinent positives and negatives related to the chief concern) are generally noted at the end of the HPI. The responses to a more extensive review, covering all organ systems, are placed in the "ROS" area of the write-up. In actual practice, most physicians do not document an inclusive ROS. The ROS questions, however, are the same ones that are used to unravel the cause of a patient's chief concern. Thus, early in training, it is a good idea to practice asking all of these questions so that you will be better able to use them for obtaining historical information when interviewing future patients. A comprehensive list can be found here: ROS Physical Exam: Generally begins with a one sentence description of the patient's appearance. Vital Signs: HEENT: Includes head, eyes, ears, nose, throat, oro-pharynx, thyroid. Lymph Nodes: Lungs: Cardiovascular: Abdomen: Rectal (as indicated): Genitalia/Pelvic: Extremities, Including Pulses: Neurologic:
Lab Results, Radiologic Studies, EKG Interpretation, Etc.: Assessment and Plan: It's worth noting that the above format is meant to provide structure and guidance. There is no gold standard, and there’s significant room for variation. When you're exposed to other styles, think about whether the proposed structure (or aspects thereof) is logical and comprehensive. Incorporate those elements that make sense into future write-ups as you work over time to develop your own style SAMPLE WRITE UP #1 ADMISSION NOTE CC: Mr. B is a 72 yo man with a history of heart failure and coronary artery disease, who presents with increasing shortness of breath, lower extremity edema and weight gain. HPI: His history of heart failure is notable for the following:
Over the past 6 months he has required increasing doses of lasix to control his edema. He was seen 2 weeks ago by his Cardiologist, Dr. Johns, at which time he was noted to have worsening leg and scrotal edema. His lasix dose was increased to 120 bid without relief of his swelling. Over the past week he and his wife have noticed a further increase in his lower extremity edema which then became markedly worse in the past two days. The swelling was accompanied by a weight gain of 10lb in 2 days (175 to 185lb) as well as a decrease in his exercise tolerance. He now becomes dyspneic when rising to get out of bed and has to rest due to SOB when walking on flat ground. He has 2 pillow orthopnea, but denies PND. Denies CP/pressure, palpitations or diaphoresis. Occasional nausea, but no vomiting. He eats normal quantities of food but does not salt or fluid intake. He also admits to frequently eating canned soup, frozen meals, and drinking 6-8 glasses liquid/day. He has increased urinary frequency, but decreased total amount of urine produced. He denies urinary urgency, dysuria or hematuria. He has not noted cough, sputum, fever or chills. He states he has been taking all prescribed medications on most days – missing a few (? 2-3) doses a week.
SAMPLE WRITE-UP #2 ADMISSION NOTE CC: Mr. S is a 65-year-old man who presents with 2 concerns: 1. Acute, painless decline in vision 2. Three day history of a cough. HPI: 2. Cough: Patient has history of COPD with 60+ pack year smoking history and most recent PFT's (2016) consistent with moderate disease. Over the past few days he has noted increased dyspnea, wheezing, and sputum production. Sputum greenish colored. He uses 2 inhalers, Formoterol and Tiotropium every day and doesn’t miss any dosages. He was treated with antibiotics and prednisone a few years ago when he experienced shortness of breath. He has not had any other breathing issues and no hospitalizations or ED visits. Denies hemoptysis, fevers, orthopnea, PND, chest pain or edema. ED course: given concern over acute visual loss and known vascular disease, a stroke code was called when patient arrived in ER. Neurology service evaluated patient and CT head obtained. Data was consistent with occipital stroke, which occurred > 24 hours ago. Additional details re management described below.
|