I don’t often give unsolicited plugs for FOAMed resources but felt I needed to share my delight at having recently discovered the IMReasoning podcast. It is the creation of two internal medicine physicians, Dr. Art Nahill and Dr. Nic Szecket, working in Auckland and is described as “Conversations to inspire critical thinking in clinical medicine and education”.  I have binge listened my way through most of the episodes and thoroughly enjoyed them all.  They have found the sweet spot – demonstrating a near perfect balance between the informative and authoritative, and the entertaining and self-deprecating.

While relevant and helpful to us all, I think it is particularly of value to those intending to sit the FRACGP Key Feature Problems (KFP) exam for the first time, and for those who plan to re-sit.  It is also a “must” for supervisors and medical educators trying to develop clinical reasoning skills in their learners.

The KFP exam is designed specifically to test clinical reasoning.  It tends to have high failure rates and many candidates find it the hardest of the three Fellowship exams to get through.

As an RACGP State Censor, one of my jobs is to give feedback to failed candidates. While exam technique and knowledge gaps are undoubtedly factors for many, time and time again I see doctors with good clinical knowledge but poor clinical reasoning (memorisers, not thinkers).   They tend to find it difficult to assess patients in the context of the scenario given and to identify the key features/critical steps.

I think this podcast might help people better understand what the KFP is about. From here on in I intend to recommend the IMReasoning podcast as a KFP study plan essential.

You can find it at http://imreasoning.com/  and it is also available to download via iTunes.

I recommend starting from the beginning as the episodes build on each other.

In Episode 31: Stump the Chumps International with Genevieve Yates, I present a case for Art and Nic, attempting to “Stump the Chumps” with a very GP-type case. I chose the case because it illustrates some of the clinical reasoning and management challenges when assessing and managing some of the more complex primary care patients. (Spoiler alert – there isn’t a glorious diagnostic prize revealed or a great “ah ha” moment”).