[pubmed] Lessons in clinical reasoning - pitfalls, myths, and pearls: the contribution of faulty data gathering and synt

Intégration des publications parues sur PUBMED
Répondre
Avatar du membre

Auteur du sujet
RSS-Bot
Ami(e) de Diamant
Ami(e) de Diamant
Messages : 6500
Enregistré le : 31 mai 2020 09:57
6
Zodiaque :
Âge : 22
Contact :
    Windows 10 Firefox

[pubmed] Lessons in clinical reasoning - pitfalls, myths, and pearls: the contribution of faulty data gathering and synt

Message par RSS-Bot »


Diagnosis (Berl). 2021 Mar 23. doi: 10.1515/dx-2019-0108. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Errors in clinical reasoning are a major factor for delayed or flawed diagnoses and put patient safety at risk. The diagnostic process is highly dependent on dynamic team factors, local hospital organization structure and culture, and cognitive factors. In everyday decision-making, physicians engage that challenge partly by relying on heuristics - subconscious mental short-cuts that are based on intuition and experience. Without structural corrective mechanisms, clinical judgement under time pressure creates space for harms resulting from systems and cognitive errors. Based on a case-example, we outline different pitfalls and provide strategies aimed at reducing diagnostic errors in health care.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 67-year-old male patient was referred to the neurology department by his primary-care physician with the diagnosis of exacerbation of known myasthenia gravis. He reported shortness of breath and generalized weakness, but no other symptoms. Diagnosis of respiratory distress due to a myasthenic crisis was made and immunosuppressive therapy and pyridostigmine were given and plasmapheresis was performed without clinical improvement. Two weeks into the hospital stay, the patient's dyspnea worsened. A CT scan revealed extensive segmental and subsegmental pulmonary emboli.

CONCLUSIONS: Faulty data gathering and flawed data synthesis are major drivers of diagnostic errors. While there is limited evidence for individual debiasing strategies, improving team factors and structural conditions can have substantial impact on the extent of diagnostic errors. Healthcare organizations should provide the structural supports to address errors and promote a constructive culture of patient safety.

PMID:33759405 | DOI:10.1515/dx-2019-0108


Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3375940 ... 4&v=2.14.3
Si vous appréciez notre travail, merci de nous soutenir un petit don en cliquant ICI

Pour obtenir la traduction en français,
cliquez sur le bouton situé dans la barre des menus en haut de cette page 

Image


Pour les donateurs, si cet article vous intéresse, nous pouvons faire l’acquisition d'un tiré-à-part.
Merci d'en faire la demande sur [email protected]


Bonne lecture...
Répondre

Retourner vers « Echos de la recherche »