Physician clinical management strategies and reasoning: a cross-sectional survey using clinical vignettes of eight common medical admissions

نویسندگان

  • Kristofer L Smith
  • Sarah Ashburn
  • Jenerius A Aminawung
  • Micah Mann
  • Joseph S Ross
چکیده

BACKGROUND Physicians often select clinical management strategies not strongly supported by evidence or guidelines. Our objective was to examine the likelihood of selecting, and rationale for pursuing, clinical management strategies with more or less guideline support among physicians using clinical vignettes of eight common medical admissions. METHODS We conducted a cross-sectional survey using clinical vignettes of attending physicians and housestaff at one internal medicine program in New York City. Each clinical vignette included a brief clinical scenario and a varying number of clinical management strategies: diagnostic tests, consultations, and treatments, some of which had strong evidence or guideline support (Level 1 strategies) while others had limited evidence or guideline support (Level 3 strategies). Likelihood of selecting a given management strategy was assessed using Likert scales and multiple response options were used to indicate rationale(s) for selections. RESULTS Our sample included 79 physicians; 68 (86%) were younger than 40 years of age, 34 (43%) were female. There were 31 attending physicians (39%) and 48 housestaff (61%) and 39 (49%) had or planned to have primarily primary care internal medicine clinical responsibilities. Overall, physicians were more likely to select Level 1 strategies "always" or "most of the time" when compared with Level 3 strategies (82% vs. 43%; p < 0.001), with wide variation across the eight medical admissions. There were no differences between attending and housestaff physician likelihood of selecting Level 3 strategies (47% vs. 45%, p = 0.36). Supportive evidence and local practice patterns were the two most common rationales behind selections; supportive evidence was cited as the most common rationale for selecting Level 1 when compared with Level 3 strategies (63% versus 30%; p < 0.001), whereas ruling out other severe conditions was cited most often for Level 3 strategies. CONCLUSIONS For eight common medical admissions, physicians selected more than 80% of management strategies with strong evidence or guideline support, but also selected more than 40% of strategies for which there was limited evidence or guideline support. The promotion of evidence-based care, including the avoidance of care that is not strongly supported by evidence or guidelines, may require better evidence dissemination and educational outreach to physicians.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Unnecessary hospital admissions in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Unnecessary patient admission to a hospital refers to the hospitalization of a patient without clinical indications and criteria. Various factors related to the patient (e.g., age, disease severity, payment method, and admission route and time), the physician and the hospital and its facilities and diagnostic technologies affect a patient unnecessary admission in a hospital. Unneces...

متن کامل

ارزیابی استدلال بالینی دستیاران و کارورزان پزشکی براساس پرسشنامه تفکر تشخیصی در دانشگاه علوم پزشکی ایران، 1392

Background: Clinical reasoning is important in any educational setting and should be included in all aspects of knowledge and skills of a student. In the clinical reasoning process the physician gains information by questioning the patient, compares this information with clinical findings and finally using his/her experience, reaches a diagnosis. Medical students at different levels show lo...

متن کامل

Occupational Therapists\' Clinical Reasoning: A Qualitative Study

Objectives: Clinical reasoning is at the heart of clinical work; it is affected by different field factors. A clear understanding of the reasoning process could solve practitioners' problems on how to make their underlying theories, assumptions and values more explicit. The aim of this research is to understand how clinical reasoning process is formed in the context of occupational therapists w...

متن کامل

A novel model of clinical reasoning: Cognitive zipper model

Introduction: Clinical reasoning is a vital aspect of physiciancompetence. It has been the subject of academic research fordecades, and various models of clinical reasoning have beenproposed. The aim of the present study was to develop a theoreticalmodel of clinical reasoning.Methods: To conduct our study, we applied the process of theorysynthesis in accordan...

متن کامل

Models of clinical reasoning with a focus on general practice: a critical review

Introduction: Diagnosis lies at the heart of general practice.Every day general practitioners (GPs) visit patients with awide variety of complaints and concerns, with often minor butsometimes serious symptoms. General practice has many featureswhich differentiate it from specialty care setting, but during thelast four decades little attention was paid to clinical reasoningin general practice. T...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 14  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2014