Vineet Chopra1,2,3, Molly Harrod4,3, Suzanna Winter2,5, Jane Forman4,3, Martha Quinn3,6, Sarah Krein4,2,3, Karen E Fowler4,3, Hardeep Singh7, Sanjay Saint4,2,3. 1. VA Ann Arbor Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. vineetc@umich.edu. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hospital Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. VA/UM Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 4. VA Ann Arbor Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 5. VA/UM Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor, Michigan USA. 6. School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 7. Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approaches of trainees to diagnosis in teaching hospitals are poorly understood. Identifying cognitive and system-based barriers and facilitators to diagnosis may improve diagnosis in these settings. METHODS: We conducted a focused ethnography of trainees at 2 academic medical centers to understand the barriers and facilitators to diagnosis. Field notes regarding the diagnostic process (eg, information gathering, integration and interpretation, working diagnosis) and the work system (eg, team members, organization, technology and tools, physical environment, tasks) were recorded. Following observations, focus groups and interviews were conducted to understand the viewpoints, problems, and solutions to improve diagnosis. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and May 2016, 4 teaching teams (4 attendings, 4 senior residents, 9 interns, and 12 medical students) were observed for 168 h. Observations of diagnosis during care led to identification of the following 4 key themes: (a) diagnosis is a social phenomenon; (b) data necessary to make diagnoses are fragmented; (c) distractions interfere with the diagnostic process; and (d) time pressures impede diagnostic decision-making. These themes suggest that specific interventions tailored to the academic setting such as team-based discussions of diagnostic workups, scheduling diagnostic time-outs during the day, and strategies to "protect" learners from interruptions might prove to be useful in improving the process of diagnosis. Future studies that implement these ideas (either alone or within a multimodal intervention) appear to be necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis in teaching hospitals is a unique process that requires improvement. Contextual insights gained from this ethnography may be used to inform future interventions.
BACKGROUND: Approaches of trainees to diagnosis in teaching hospitals are poorly understood. Identifying cognitive and system-based barriers and facilitators to diagnosis may improve diagnosis in these settings. METHODS: We conducted a focused ethnography of trainees at 2 academic medical centers to understand the barriers and facilitators to diagnosis. Field notes regarding the diagnostic process (eg, information gathering, integration and interpretation, working diagnosis) and the work system (eg, team members, organization, technology and tools, physical environment, tasks) were recorded. Following observations, focus groups and interviews were conducted to understand the viewpoints, problems, and solutions to improve diagnosis. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and May 2016, 4 teaching teams (4 attendings, 4 senior residents, 9 interns, and 12 medical students) were observed for 168 h. Observations of diagnosis during care led to identification of the following 4 key themes: (a) diagnosis is a social phenomenon; (b) data necessary to make diagnoses are fragmented; (c) distractions interfere with the diagnostic process; and (d) time pressures impede diagnostic decision-making. These themes suggest that specific interventions tailored to the academic setting such as team-based discussions of diagnostic workups, scheduling diagnostic time-outs during the day, and strategies to "protect" learners from interruptions might prove to be useful in improving the process of diagnosis. Future studies that implement these ideas (either alone or within a multimodal intervention) appear to be necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis in teaching hospitals is a unique process that requires improvement. Contextual insights gained from this ethnography may be used to inform future interventions.
Authors: Molly Harrod; Lauren E Weston; Claire Robinson; Adam Tremblay; Clinton L Greenstone; Jane Forman Journal: J Interprof Care Date: 2016-03-30 Impact factor: 2.338
Authors: Ali S Saber Tehrani; HeeWon Lee; Simon C Mathews; Andrew Shore; Martin A Makary; Peter J Pronovost; David E Newman-Toker Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Laura Zwaan; Sandra Monteiro; Jonathan Sherbino; Jonathan Ilgen; Betty Howey; Geoffrey Norman Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Christina L Cifra; Kimberly C Dukes; Brennan S Ayres; Kelsey A Calomino; Loreen A Herwaldt; Hardeep Singh; Heather Schacht Reisinger Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2020-09-18 Impact factor: 4.298