How and when do expert emergency physicians generate and evaluate diagnostic hypotheses? A qualitative study using head-mounted video cued-recall interviews (original) (raw)
Related papers
Critical Care Research and Practice, 2018
Introduction. Appropriate decision-making is essential in emergency situations; however, little information is available on how emergency decision-makers decide on the emergency status of the patients shifted to the emergency department of the hospital. This study aimed at explaining the factors that influence the emergency specialists’ decision-making in case of emergency conditions in patients. Methods. This study was carried out with a qualitative content analysis approach. The participants were selected based on purposive sampling by the emergency specialists. The data were collected through semistructured interviews and were analyzed using the method proposed by Graneheim and Lundman. Results. The core theme of the study was “efforts to perceive the acute health threats of the patient.” This theme was derived from the main classes, including “the identification of the acute threats based on the patient’s condition” and “the identification of the acute threats based on periphera...
Diagnosis, 2019
Background Avoiding or correcting a diagnostic error first requires identification of an error and perhaps deciding to revise a diagnosis, but little is known about the factors that lead to revision. Three aspects of reflective practice, seeking Alternative explanations, exploring the Consequences of missing these alternative diagnoses, identifying Traits that may contradict the provisional diagnosis, were incorporated into a three-point diagnostic checklist (abbreviated to ACT). Methods Seventeen first and second year emergency medicine residents from the University of Toronto participated. Participants read up to eight case vignettes and completed the ACT diagnostic checklist. Provisional and final diagnoses and all responses for alternatives, consequences, and traits were individually scored as correct or incorrect. Additionally, each consequence was scored on a severity scale from 0 (not severe) to 3 (very severe). Average scores for alternatives, consequences, and traits and th...
What do emergency physicians in charge do? A qualitative observational study
Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2017
The emergency physician in charge role has developed in many large EDs to assist with patient flow. We aimed to describe and classify the problem-solving actions that this role requires. We interviewed senior emergency physicians and performed iterative, qualitative observations, using continuous reflective inquiry, in a single centre. We reviewed and classified these approaches by consensus. Nine different problem-solving approaches were identified. These are deflecting, front loading, placing, plucking, flooding, targeting, chasing, guiding and juggling. These are useful for training and developing our understanding of how to manage an ED. Emergency physicians in charge have a number of problem-solving approaches that can be readily defined. We have described and categorised these. These results are potentially useful for developing decision support software.
Creating authentic video scenarios for use in prehospital research
International emergency nursing, 2017
Video scenarios have been used to explore clinical reasoning during interviews in Think Aloud studies. This study used nominal group technique with experts to create video scenarios to explore the ways paramedics think and reason when caring for children who are sick or injured. At present there is little research regarding paramedics' clinical reasoning with respect to performing non-urgent procedures on children. A core expert panel identified the central structure of a prehospital clinical interaction and the range of contextual factors that may influence a paramedic's clinical reasoning [the way in which information is gathered, interpreted and analysed by clinicians]. The structure and contextual factors were then incorporated into two filmed scenarios. A second panel of clinical practice experts, then critiqued the body language, spoken word and age appropriate behaviours of those acting in the video scenarios and compared them against their own experience of clinical ...
Do emergency physicians trust their patients?
Internal and emergency medicine, 2016
The primary focus of research on the physician-patient relationship has been on patients' trust in their physicians. In this study, we explored physicians' trust in their patients. We held semi-structured interviews with expert emergency physicians concerning a patient they had just been managing. The physicians had been equipped with a head-mounted micro camera to film the encounter from an "own point of view perspective". The footage was used to stimulate recall during the interviews. Several participants made judgments on the reliability of their patients' accounts from the very beginning of the encounter. If accounts were not deemed reliable, participants implemented a variety of specific strategies in pursuing their history taking, i.e. checking for consistency by asking the same question at several points in the interview, cross-referencing information, questioning third-parties, examining the patient record, and systematically collecting data held to be ...
BMC Emergency Medicine
Background Out-of-hospital Emergency Medical Services (OHEMS) require fast and accurate assessment of patients and efficient clinical judgment in the face of uncertainty and ambiguity. Guidelines and protocols can support staff in these situations, but there is significant variability in their use. Therefore, the aim of this study was to increase our understanding of physician decision-making in OHEMS, in particular, to characterize the types of decisions made and to explore potential facilitating and hindering factors. Methods Qualitative interview study of 21 physicians in a large, publicly-owned and operated OHEMS in Croatia. Data was subjected to an inductive content analysis. Results Physicians (mostly young, female, and early in their career), made three decisions (transport, treat, and if yes on either, how) after an initial patient assessment. Decisions were influenced by patient needs, but to a greater extent by factors related to themselves and patients (microsystem), thei...