Literature DB >> 26951795

Do patients' disruptive behaviours influence the accuracy of a doctor's diagnosis? A randomised experiment.

H G Schmidt1, Tamara Van Gog1, Stephanie Ce Schuit2, Kees Van den Berge3, Paul L Van Daele2, Herman Bueving4, Tim Van der Zee1, Walter W Van den Broek5, Jan L Van Saase2, Sílvia Mamede5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Literature suggests that patients who display disruptive behaviours in the consulting room fuel negative emotions in doctors. These emotions, in turn, are said to cause diagnostic errors. Evidence substantiating this claim is however lacking. The purpose of the present experiment was to study the effect of such difficult patients' behaviours on doctors' diagnostic performance.
METHODS: We created six vignettes in which patients were depicted as difficult (displaying distressing behaviours) or neutral. Three clinical cases were deemed to be diagnostically simple and three deemed diagnostically complex. Sixty-three family practice residents were asked to evaluate the vignettes and make the patient's diagnosis quickly and then through deliberate reflection. In addition, amount of time needed to arrive at a diagnosis was measured. Finally, the participants rated the patient's likability.
RESULTS: Mean diagnostic accuracy scores (range 0-1) were significantly lower for difficult than for neutral patients (0.54 vs 0.64; p=0.017). Overall diagnostic accuracy was higher for simple than for complex cases. Deliberate reflection upon the case improved initial diagnostic, regardless of case complexity and of patient behaviours (0.60 vs 0.68, p=0.002). Amount of time needed to diagnose the case was similar regardless of the patient's behaviour. Finally, average likability ratings were lower for difficult than for neutral-patient cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Disruptive behaviours displayed by patients seem to induce doctors to make diagnostic errors. Interestingly, the confrontation with difficult patients does however not cause the doctor to spend less time on such case. Time can therefore not be considered an intermediary between the way the patient is perceived, his or her likability and diagnostic performance. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision making; Diagnostic errors; Medical education

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26951795     DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf        ISSN: 2044-5415            Impact factor:   7.035


  13 in total

1.  Emotionally evocative patients in the emergency department: a mixed methods investigation of providers' reported emotions and implications for patient safety.

Authors:  Linda M Isbell; Julia Tager; Kendall Beals; Guanyu Liu
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 7.035

2.  Taking patient virtue seriously.

Authors:  J K Miles
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2019-04

3.  A study to explore specific stressors and coping strategies in primary dental care practice.

Authors:  R Bretherton; H R Chapman; S Chipchase
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-05-13       Impact factor: 1.626

4.  Training for Failure: A Simulation Program for Emergency Medicine Residents to Improve Communication Skills in Service Recovery.

Authors:  Alise Frallicciardi; Seth Lotterman; Matthew Ledford; Ilana Prenovitz; Rochelle Van Meter; Chia-Ling Kuo; Thomas Nowicki; Robert Fuller
Journal:  AEM Educ Train       Date:  2018-07-26

5.  Diagnostic error increases mortality and length of hospital stay in patients presenting through the emergency room.

Authors:  Wolf E Hautz; Juliane E Kämmer; Stefanie C Hautz; Thomas C Sauter; Laura Zwaan; Aristomenis K Exadaktylos; Tanja Birrenbach; Volker Maier; Martin Müller; Stefan K Schauber
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2019-05-08       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Patient-physician relationship and use of gut feeling in cancer diagnosis in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of patients and their general practitioners.

Authors:  Anette Fischer Pedersen; Christina Maar Andersen; Mads Lind Ingeman; Peter Vedsted
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Resource consumption of multi-substance users in the emergency room: A neglected patient group.

Authors:  Laurence Klenk; Christina von Rütte; Jonathan F Henssler; Thomas C Sauter; Wolf E Hautz; Aristomenis K Exadaktylos; Martin Müller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Do poor patients suffer from inaccurate diagnoses more than well-to-do patients? A randomized control trial.

Authors:  Ibrahim Al Alwan; Mohi Eldin Magzoub; Ali Al Haqwi; Motasin Badri; Sarah M Al Yousif; Amir Babiker; Sílvia Mamede; Henk G Schmidt
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.463

9.  Clinician-family relationships may impact neonatal intensive care: clinicians' perspectives.

Authors:  Jennifer J Miller; Janet R Serwint; Renee D Boss
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2021-06-05       Impact factor: 2.521

10.  Teaching clinical reasoning through hypothetico-deduction is (slightly) better than self-explanation in tutorial groups: An experimental study.

Authors:  Ahmed Al Rumayyan; Nasr Ahmed; Reem Al Subait; Ghassan Al Ghamdi; Moeber Mohammed Mahzari; Tarig Awad Mohamed; Jerome I Rotgans; Mustafa Donmez; Silvia Mamede; Henk G Schmidt
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2018-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.