Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Diagnosis

Official Journal of the Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine (SIDM)

Editor-in-Chief: Graber, Mark L. / Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Argy, Nicolas / Epner, Paul L. / Lippi, Giuseppe / McDonald, Kathryn / Singh, Hardeep

Editorial Board: Basso , Daniela / Crock, Carmel / Croskerry, Pat / Dhaliwal, Gurpreet / Ely, John / Giannitsis, Evangelos / Katus, Hugo A. / Laposata, Michael / Lyratzopoulos, Yoryos / Maude, Jason / Newman-Toker, David / Singhal, Geeta / Sittig, Dean F. / Sonntag, Oswald / Zwaan, Laura

4 Issues per year

Online
ISSN
2194-802X
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Identification of facilitators and barriers to residents’ use of a clinical reasoning tool

Deborah DiNardo / Sarah Tilstra / Melissa McNeil / William Follansbee / Shanta Zimmer / Coreen Farris / Amber E. Barnato
Published Online: 2018-02-09 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2017-0037

Abstract

Background:

While there is some experimental evidence to support the use of cognitive forcing strategies to reduce diagnostic error in residents, the potential usability of such strategies in the clinical setting has not been explored. We sought to test the effect of a clinical reasoning tool on diagnostic accuracy and to obtain feedback on its usability and acceptability.

Methods:

We conducted a randomized behavioral experiment testing the effect of this tool on diagnostic accuracy on written cases among post-graduate 3 (PGY-3) residents at a single internal medical residency program in 2014. Residents completed written clinical cases in a proctored setting with and without prompts to use the tool. The tool encouraged reflection on concordant and discordant aspects of each case. We used random effects regression to assess the effect of the tool on diagnostic accuracy of the independent case sets, controlling for case complexity. We then conducted audiotaped structured focus group debriefing sessions and reviewed the tapes for facilitators and barriers to use of the tool.

Results:

Of 51 eligible PGY-3 residents, 34 (67%) participated in the study. The average diagnostic accuracy increased from 52% to 60% with the tool, a difference that just met the test for statistical significance in adjusted analyses (p=0.05). Residents reported that the tool was generally acceptable and understandable but did not recognize its utility for use with simple cases, suggesting the presence of overconfidence bias.

Conclusions:

A clinical reasoning tool improved residents’ diagnostic accuracy on written cases. Overconfidence bias is a potential barrier to its use in the clinical setting.

Keywords: clinical reasoning tool; diagnostic error; graduate medical education; overconfidence bias

References

  • 1.

    Graber ML, Franklin N, Gordon R. Diagnostic error in internal medicine. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:1493–9.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 2.

    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Improving Diagnosis in Health Care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21794.

  • 3.

    Croskerry P, Singhal G, Mamede S. Cognitive debiasing 1: origins of bias and theory of debiasing. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:ii58–64.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Lambe KA, O’Reilly G, Kelly BD, Curristan S. Dual-process cognitive interventions to enhance diagnostic reasoning: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2016;25:808–20.PubMedCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Mamede S, Schmidt HG, Penaforte JC. Effects of reflective practice on the accuracy of medical diagnoses. Med Educ 2008;42:468–75.PubMedCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 6.

    Mamede S, van Gog T, van den Berge K, Rikers RM, van Saase JL, van Guldener C, et al. Effect of availability bias and reflective reasoning on diagnostic accuracy among internal medicine residents. J Am Med Assoc 2010;304:1198–203.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Berner ES, Graber ML. Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. Am J Med 2008;121:S2–23.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 8.

    Meyer AN, Payne VL, Meeks DW, Rao R, Singh H. Physicians’ diagnostic accuracy, confidence, and resource requests: a vignette study. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:1952–8.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 9.

    Zwaan L, Monteiro S, Sherbino J, Ilgen J, Howey B, Norman G. Is bias in the eye of the beholder? A vignette study to assess recognition of cognitive biases in clinical case workups. BMJ Qual Saf 2017;26:104–10.Web of SciencePubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 10.

    Croskerry P, Singhal G, Mamede S. Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22(Suppl 2)ii:65–72.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 11.

    Kapur N, Parand A, Soukup T, Reader T, Sevdalis N. Aviation and healthcare: a comparative review with implications for patient safety. JRSM Open 2016;7:2054270415616548.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 12.

    Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:488–96.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 13.

    Kachalia A, Gandhi TK, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Thomas EJ, Griffey R, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the emergency department: a study of closed malpractice claims from 4 liability insurers. Ann Emerg Med 2007;49: 196–205.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 14.

    Jagsi R, Kitch BT, Weinstein DF, Campbell EG, Hutter M, Weissman JS. Residents report on adverse events and their causes. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:2607–13.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 15.

    Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974;185:1124–31.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 16.

    Schmidt HG, Rikers RM. How expertise develops in medicine: knowledge encapsulation and illness script formation. Med Educ 2007;41:1133–9.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 17.

    Monteiro SD, Sherbino J, Patel A, Mazzetti I, Norman GR, Howey E. Reflecting on diagnostic errors: taking a second look is not enough. J Gen Intern Med 2015;30:1270–4.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 18.

    Sherbino J, Dore KL, Wood TJ, Young ME, Gaissmaier W, Kreuger S, et al. The relationship between response time and diagnostic accuracy. Acad Med 2012;87:785–91.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 19.

    Norman G, Sherbino J, Dore K, Wood T, Young M, Gaissmaier W, et al. The etiology of diagnostic errors: a controlled trial of system 1 versus system 2 reasoning. Acad Med 2014;89:277–84.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

About the article

Corresponding author: Deborah DiNardo, MD, MS, Department of Medicine, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA, Phone: +412-360-1709


Received: 2017-10-16

Accepted: 2018-01-11

Published Online: 2018-02-09

Published in Print: 2018-03-28


Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

Research funding: This project was funded by a grant from the Hearst Foundations awarded to Dr. William Follansbee.

Employment or leadership: None declared.

Honorarium: None declared.

Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.


Citation Information: Diagnosis, Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 21–28, ISSN (Online) 2194-802X, ISSN (Print) 2194-8011, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2017-0037.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in