Asking for 'rules of thumb': a way to discover tacit knowledge in general practice

Tacit knowledge in dyads of persons with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and their caregivers: An interpretative literature study

BACKGROUND

Caring for persons with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) demands specific expertise. Tacit knowledge seems to play an important role, but little is known about its nature, including what is necessary for its development and transfer.

AIM

To gain understanding of the nature and development of tacit knowledge between persons with PIMD and their caregivers.

METHOD

We conducted an interpretative synthesis of literature on tacit knowledge in caregiving dyads with persons with PIMD, persons with dementia or infants. Twelve studies were included.

RESULTS

Tacit knowledge is about caregivers and care-recipients becoming sensitive and responsive to each other's cues and together crafting care routines. Learning takes place in a constant process of action and response that transforms those involved.

CONCLUSION

Building tacit knowledge together is necessary for persons with PIMD to learn to recognise and express their needs. Suggestions are made for ways to facilitate its development and transfer.

Decision Making: a Theoretical Review

Decision-making is a crucial skill that has a central role in everyday life and is necessary for adaptation to the environment and autonomy. It is the ability to choose between two or more options, and it has been studied through several theoretical approaches and by different disciplines. In this overview article, we contend a theoretical review regarding most theorizing and research on decision-making. Specifically, we focused on different levels of analyses, including different theoretical approaches and neuropsychological aspects. Moreover, common methodological measures adopted to study decision-making were reported. This theoretical review emphasizes multiple levels of analysis and aims to summarize evidence regarding this fundamental human process. Although several aspects of the field are reported, more features of decision-making process remain uncertain and need to be clarified. Further experimental studies are necessary for understanding this process better and for integrating and refining the existing theories.

Embracing complexity with systems thinking in general practitioners' clinical reasoning helps handling uncertainty

Clinical reasoning in general practice is increasingly challenging because of the rise in the number of patients with multimorbidity. This creates uncertainty because of unpredictable interactions between the symptoms from multiple medical problems and the patient's personality, psychosocial context and life history. Case analysis may then be more appropriately managed by systems thinking than by hypothetic-deductive reasoning, the predominant paradigm in the current teaching of clinical reasoning. Application of "systems thinking" tools such as causal loop diagrams allows the patient's problems to be viewed holistically and facilitates understanding of the complex interactions. We will show how complexity levels can be graded in clinical reasoning and demonstrate where and how systems thinking can have added value by means of a case history.

Thresholds, rules and defensive strategies: how physicians learn from their prior diagnosis-related experiences

Background Health professionals are encouraged to learn from their errors. Determining how primary care physicians (PCPs) react to a case, in which their original diagnosis differed from the final outcome, could provide new insights on how they learn from experiences. We explored how PCPs altered their diagnostic evaluation of future patients after cases where the originally assumed diagnosis turned out to be wrong. Methods We asked German PCPs to complete an online survey where they described how the patient concerned originally presented, the subsequent course of events and whether they would change their diagnostic work-up of future patients. Qualitative methods were used to analyze narrative text obtained by this survey. Results A total of 29 PCPs submitted cases, most of which were ultimately found to be more severe than originally assumed. PCPs (n = 27) reflected on changes to their subsequent clinical decisions in the form of general maxims (n = 20) or more specific rules (n = 11). Most changes would have resulted in a lower threshold for investigations, referral and/or a more extensive collection of diagnostic information. PCPs decided not only to listen more often to their intuition (gut feelings), but to also practice more analytical reasoning. Participants felt the need for change of practice even if no clinical standards had been violated in the diagnosis of that case. Some decided to resort to defensive strategies in the future. Conclusions We describe mechanisms by which physicians calibrate their decision thresholds, as well as their cognitive mode (intuitive vs. analytical). PCPs reported the need for change in clinical practice despite the absence of error in some cases.

Scientism recognizes evidence only of the quantitative/general variety

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

McHugh and Walker introduced a model of knowledge to demonstrate that EBM is a form of scientism that ignores important sources of knowledge thereby impairing the practice of medicine. We study the development of this model and explore additional applications.

METHODS

Review of the relevant literature and identification of possible areas for fruitful application.

RESULTS

We show that the McHugh and Walker model is closely related to the model of evidence considered earlier by Upshur et al. We also indicate that the utility of this model is not limited to showing scientism distorts clinical practice. Several representative applications are identified, including psychotherapy, the Salk polio vaccine trial, and the placebo effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Priority should be given to Upshur et al for the development of a model that has far-reaching application to medical epistemology. It is shown that all four of the types of evidence considered-qualitative/personal, qualitative/general, quantitative/general, and quantitative/personal-are required to adequately characterize epistemology in medical research and practice.

Advancing the Science of Deprescribing: A Novel Comprehensive Conceptual Framework

Polypharmacy is common in older adults and associated with inappropriate medication use, adverse drug events, medication nonadherence, higher costs, and increased mortality compared with those without polypharmacy. Deprescribing, the clinically supervised process of stopping or reducing the dose of medications when they cause harm or no longer provide benefit, may improve outcomes. Although potentially beneficial, clinicians struggle to overcome structural, organizational, technological, and cognitive barriers to deprescribing, limiting its use in clinical practice. Deprescribing science would benefit from a unifying conceptual framework to prioritize research. Current deprescribing conceptual frameworks have made important contributions to the field but often with a focus on specific medication classes or aspects of deprescribing. To further this relatively nascent field, we developed a broader deprescribing conceptual framework that builds on prior frameworks and includes patient, prescriber, and system influences; the process of deprescribing; outcomes; and dissemination. Patient factors include patients' biology, experience, values, and preferences. Prescriber factors include rational (eg, based on explicit knowledge) and nonrational (eg, behavioral tendencies, biases, and heuristics) decision making. System factors include resources, incentives, goals, and culture that contribute to deprescribing. The framework separates the deprescribing decision from the deprescribing process. The framework captures the results of deprescribing by examining changes in clinical structures, performance processes, patient experience, health outcomes, and cost. Through testing and refinement, this novel, more comprehensive conceptual framework has the potential to advance deprescribing research by organizing the existing evidence, identifying evidence gaps, and categorizing deprescribing interventions and the settings in which they are applied. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2018-2022, 2019.

Solving the Diagnostic Challenge: A Patient-Centered Approach

Arriving at an agreed-on and valid explanation for a clinical problem is important to patients as well as to clinicians. Current theories of how clinicians arrive at diagnoses, such as the threshold approach and the hypothetico-deductive model, do not accurately describe the diagnostic process in general practice. The problem space in general practice is so large and the prior probability of each disease being present is so small that it is not realistic to limit the diagnostic process to testing specific diagnoses on the clinician's list of possibilities. Here, new evidence is discussed about how patients and clinicians collaborate in specific ways, in particular, via a process that can be termed inductive foraging, which may lead to information that triggers a diagnostic routine. Navigating the diagnostic challenge and using patient-centered consulting are not separate tasks but rather synergistic.

'We don't have recipes; we just have loads of ingredients': explanations of evidence and clinical decision making by speech and language therapists

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Research findings consistently suggest that speech and language therapists (SLTs) are failing to draw effectively on research-based evidence to guide clinical practice. This study aimed to examine what constitutes the reasoning provided by SLTs for treatment choices and whether science plays a part in those decisions.

METHOD

This study, based in Ireland, reports on the qualitative phase of a mixed-methods study, which examined attitudes underpinning treatment choices and the therapy process. SLTs were recruited from community, hospital and disability work settings via SLT managers who acted as gatekeepers. A total of three focus groups were run. Data were transcribed, anonymized and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 48 participants took part in the focus groups. The majority of participants were female, represented senior grades and had basic professional qualifications. Three key themes were identified: practice imperfect; practice as grounded and growing; and critical practice. Findings show that treatment decisions are scaffolded primarily on practice evidence. The uniqueness of each patient results in dynamic and pragmatic practice, constraining the application of unmodified therapies.

CONCLUSION

The findings emerging from the data reflect the complexities and paradoxes of clinical practice as described by SLTs. Practice is pivoted on both the patient and clinician, through their membership of groups and as individuals. Scientific thinking is a component of decision making; a tool with which to approach the various ingredients and the dynamic nature of clinical practice. However, these scientific elements do not necessarily reflect evidence-based practice as typically constructed.

Diagnosing headache in primary care: a qualitative study of GPs' approaches

BACKGROUND

Headache is one of the most common symptoms in primary care. Most headaches are due to primary headaches and many headache sufferers do not receive a specific diagnosis. There is still a gap in research on how GPs diagnose and treat patients with headache.

AIM

To identify GPs' diagnostic approaches in patients presenting with headache.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative study with 15 GPs in urban and rural practices.

METHOD

Interviews (20-40 minutes) were conducted using a semi-structured interview guideline. GPs described their individual diagnostic strategies by means of patients presenting with headache that they had prospectively identified during the previous 4 weeks. Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative analysis was conducted by two independent raters.

RESULTS

Regarding GPs' general diagnostic approach to patients with headache, four broad themes emerged during the interviews: 'knowing the patient and their background', 'first impression during consultation', 'intuition and personal experience' and 'application of the test of time'. Four further themes were identified regarding the management of diagnostic uncertainty: 'identification of red flags', 'use of the familiarity heuristic', 'therapeutic trial', and 'triggers for patient referral'.

CONCLUSION

GPs apply different strategies in the early diagnostic phase when managing patients with headache. Identification of potential adverse outcomes accompanied by other strategies for handling uncertainty seem to be more important than an exact diagnosis. Established guidelines do not play a role in the diagnostic workup.

Heuristics in primary care for recognition of unreported vision loss in older people: a technology development study

AIM

To evaluate heuristics (rules of thumb) for recognition of undetected vision loss in older patients in primary care.

BACKGROUND

Vision loss is associated with ageing, and its prevalence is increasing. Visual impairment has a broad impact on health, functioning and well-being. Unrecognised vision loss remains common, and screening interventions have yet to reduce its prevalence. An alternative approach is to enhance practitioners' skills in recognising undetected vision loss, by having a more detailed picture of those who are likely not to act on vision changes, report symptoms or have eye tests. This paper describes a qualitative technology development study to evaluate heuristics for recognition of undetected vision loss in older patients in primary care.

METHOD

Using a previous modelling study, two heuristics in the form of mnemonics were developed to aid pattern recognition and allow general practitioners to identify potential cases of unreported vision loss. These heuristics were then analysed with experts. Findings It was concluded that their implementation in modern general practice was unsuitable and an alternative solution should be sort.

Strategies for diagnosing leg oedema in primary care: a qualitative study of GPs' approaches

BACKGROUND

The symptom leg oedema represents a broad range of possible underlying aetiologies. The background of leg oedema is multifactorial and usually the GP is the first contact point for patients presenting with this symptom. GPs rely on patient history and physical examination as their main diagnostic tools.

OBJECTIVE

To identify GPs' diagnostic approaches and heuristics in patients presenting with leg oedema.

METHODS

Interviews with 15 GPs (20-30 min) using a semi-structured interview-guideline were conducted. GPs described their individual diagnostic strategies concerning all patients presenting with leg oedema they had prospectively identified during the previous four weeks. Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative analysis was conducted by two independent raters.

RESULTS

GPs applied a variety of diagnostic approaches, which can be grouped in active and passive strategies. Active strategies comprised the use of decision rules and guidelines, Bayesian arguing, problem dichotomisation and discrepancy heuristics. Passive approaches included test of time, therapy as diagnosis, and taking patient assumptions into account.

CONCLUSION

When dealing with leg oedema, GPs use prior information of individual patients in a specific way. There is a broad variety of diagnostic approaches that can be grouped in 'active' and 'passive' behaviour. Approaches mostly match with established diagnostic strategies in primary care.

The time-efficiency principle: time as the key diagnostic strategy in primary care

The test and retest opportunity afforded by reviewing a patient over time substantially increases the total gain in certainty when making a diagnosis in low-prevalence settings (the time-efficiency principle). This approach safely and efficiently reduces the number of patients who need to be formally tested in order to make a correct diagnosis for a person. Time, in terms of observed disease trajectory, provides a vital mechanism for achieving this task. It remains the best strategy for delivering near-optimal diagnoses in low-prevalence settings and should be used to its full advantage.

Why is tractable vision loss in older people being missed? Qualitative study

BACKGROUND

There is compelling evidence that there is substantial undetected vision loss amongst older people. Early recognition of undetected vision loss and timely referral for treatment might be possible within general practice, but methods of identifying those with unrecognised vision loss and persuading them to take up services that will potentially improve their eyesight and quality of life are not well understood. Population screening does not lead to improved vision in the older population. The aim of this study is to understand why older people with vision loss respond (or not) to their deteriorating eyesight.

METHODS

Focus groups and interviews were carried out with 76 people aged 65 and over from one general practice in London who had taken part in an earlier study of health risk appraisal. An analytic induction approach was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Three polarised themes emerged from the groups and interviews. 1) The capacity of individuals to take decisions and act on them effectively versus a collection of factors which acted as obstacles to older people taking care of their eyesight. 2) The belief that prevention is better than cure versus the view that deteriorating vision is an inevitable part of old age. 3) The incongruence between the professionalism and personalised approach of opticians and the commercialisation of their services.

CONCLUSIONS

The reasons why older people may not seek help for deteriorating vision can be explained in a model in which psychological attributes, costs to the individual and judgments about normal ageing interact. Understanding this model may help clinical decision making and health promotion efforts.

Care decision making of frontline providers of maternal and newborn health services in the greater Accra region of Ghana

Objectives

To explore the “how” and “why” of care decision making by frontline providers of maternal and newborn services in the Greater Accra region of Ghana and determine appropriate interventions needed to support its quality and related maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Methods

A cross sectional and descriptive mixed method study involving a desk review of maternal and newborn care protocols and guidelines availability, focus group discussions and administration of a structured questionnaire and observational checklist to frontline providers of maternal and newborn care.

Results

Tacit knowledge or ‘mind lines’ was an important primary approach to care decision making. When available, protocols and guidelines were used as decision making aids, especially when they were simple handy tools and in situations where providers were not sure what their next step in management had to be. Expert opinion and peer consultation were also used through face to face discussions, phone calls, text messages, and occasional emails depending on the urgency and communication medium access. Health system constraints such as availability of staff, essential medicines, supplies and equipment; management issues (including leadership and interpersonal relations among staff), and barriers to referral were important influences in decision making. Frontline health providers welcomed the idea of interventions to support clinical decision making and made several proposals towards the development of such an intervention. They felt such an intervention ought to be multi-faceted to impact the multiple influences simultaneously. Effective interventions would also need to address immediate challenges as well as more long-term challenges influencing decision-making.

Conclusion

Supporting frontline worker clinical decision making for maternal and newborn services is an important but neglected aspect of improved quality of care towards attainment of MDG 4 & 5. A multi-faceted intervention is probably the best way to make a difference given the multiple inter-related issues.

How does the thought of cancer arise in a general practice consultation? Interviews with GPs

BACKGROUND

Only a few patients on a GP's list develop cancer each year. To find these cases in the jumble of presented problems is a challenge.

OBJECTIVE

To explore how general practitioners (GPs) come to think of cancer in a clinical encounter.

DESIGN

Qualitative interviews with Norwegian GPs, who were invited to think back on consultations during which the thought of cancer arose. The 11 GPs recounted and reflected on 70 such stories from their practices. A phenomenographic approach enabled the study of variation in GPs' ways of experiencing.

RESULTS

Awareness of cancer could arise in several contexts of attention: (1) Practising basic knowledge: explicit rules and skills, such as alarm symptoms, epidemiology and clinical know-how; (2) Interpersonal awareness: being alert to changes in patients' appearance or behaviour and to cues in their choice of words, on a background of basic knowledge and experience; (3) Intuitive knowing: a tacit feeling of alarm which could be difficult to verbalize, but nevertheless was helpful. Intuition built on the earlier mentioned contexts: basic knowledge, experience, and interpersonal awareness; (4) Fear of cancer: the existential context of awareness could affect the thoughts of both doctor and patient. The challenge could be how not to think about cancer all the time and to find ways to live with insecurity without becoming over-precautious.

CONCLUSION

The thought of cancer arose in the relationship between doctor and patient. The quality of their interaction and the doctor's accuracy in perceiving and interpreting cues were decisive.

GPs' decision-making--perceiving the patient as a person or a disease

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyse the clinical decision making strategies of GPs with regard to the whole range of problems encountered in everyday work.

METHODS

A prospective questionnaire study was carried through, where 16 General practitioners in Sweden registered consecutively 378 problems in 366 patients.

RESULTS

68.3% of the problems were registered as somatic, 5.8% as psychosocial and 25.9% as both somatic and psychosocial. When the problem was characterised as somatic the main emphasis was most often on the symptoms only, and when the problem was psychosocial main emphasis was given to the person. Immediate, inductive, decision-making contrary to gradual, analytical, was used for about half of the problems. Immediate decision-making was less often used when problems were registered as both somatic and psychosocial and focus was on both the symptoms and the person. When immediate decision-making was used the GPs were significantly more often certain of their identification of the problem and significantly more satisfied with their consultation. Rules of thumb in consultations registered as somatic with emphasis on symptoms only did not include any reference to the individual patient. In consultations registered as psychosocial with emphasis on the person, rules of thumb often included reference to the patient as a known person.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision-making (immediate or gradual) registered by the GPs seemed to have been adjusted on the symptom or on the patient as a person. Our results indicate that the GPs seem to recognise immediately both problems and persons, hence the quintessence of the expert skill of the GP as developed through experience.

Therapeutic identification of depression in young people: lessons from the introduction of a new technique in general practice

BACKGROUND

Mild-to-moderate depression in young people is associated with impaired social functioning and high rates of affective disorder in adult life. Earlier recognition of depression in young people has the potential to reduce the burden of depression in adulthood. However, depression in teenagers is underdiagnosed and undertreated.

AIM

To assess the usability and usefulness of a cognitive-behavioural-therapy-based technique for Therapeutic Identification of Depression in Young people (TIDY).

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative study of four group practices in northwest London.

METHOD

Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with practitioners who had been trained in the use of the TIDY technique.

RESULTS

Twenty-five GPs and six nurses were interviewed. The key themes that emerged from the interviews were: practitioners were 'making sense of teenage depression' when interpreting signs and symptoms; the training in the technique was variable in its impact on practitioners' attitudes and practice; and time factors constrained practitioners in the application of the technique.

CONCLUSION

The TIDY technique is usable in routine practice, but only if practitioners are allowed to use it selectively. This need for selectivity arises partly from concerns about time management, and partly to avoid medicalisation of psychological distress in young people. The perceived usefulness of the TIDY technique depends on the practitioner's prior knowledge, experience, and awareness.

Cognitive balanced model: a conceptual scheme of diagnostic decision making

RATIONALE

Diagnostic reasoning is a critical aspect of clinical performance, having a high impact on quality and safety of care. Although diagnosis is fundamental in medicine, we still have a poor understanding of the factors that determine its course. According to traditional understanding, all information used in diagnostic reasoning is objective and logically driven. However, these conditions are not always met. Although we would be less likely to make an inaccurate diagnosis when following rational decision making, as described by normative models, the real diagnostic process works in a different way. Recent work has described the major cognitive biases in medicine as well as a number of strategies for reducing them, collectively called debiasing techniques. However, advances have encountered obstacles in achieving implementation into clinical practice.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

While traditional understanding of clinical reasoning has failed to consider contextual factors, most debiasing techniques seem to fail in raising sound and safer medical praxis. Technological solutions, being data driven, are fundamental in increasing care safety, but they need to consider human factors. Thus, balanced models, cognitive driven and technology based, are needed in day-to-day applications to actually improve the diagnostic process. The purpose of this article, then, is to provide insight into cognitive influences that have resulted in wrong, delayed or missed diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a cognitive approach, we describe the basis of medical error, with particular emphasis on diagnostic error. We then propose a conceptual scheme of the diagnostic process by the use of fuzzy cognitive maps.

Revisiting the educationally influential physician: development of a simplified nomination form

INTRODUCTION

An educationally influential (EI) physician is one to whom colleagues look for informal clinical advice. The original nomination form created to identify EI physicians among general practitioners was published in 1978. The present research developed an updated and simplified nomination form based on a survey of specialists.

METHODS

A mailed questionnaire asked specialists treating neuromuscular disease to consider traits they might look for in colleagues when seeking clinical advice and rate them on a 6-point Likert-type scale. Based on study hypotheses, the traits were categorized a priori as representing one of four categories: approachability, declarative knowledge, practice-based procedural knowledge, and translational ability. The response rate among the approximately 500 specialists surveyed was 45%.

RESULTS

Practice-based procedural knowledge items were most highly rated, followed by translational ability, approachability, then declarative items. Women specialists selected a slightly different constellation of traits, including less emphasis on approachability. Performing, publishing, and even reading current research were not, on average, considered essential in an informal clinical advisor.

DISCUSSION

Colleagues identified as informal clinical advisors (ICAs) by neuromuscular specialists cannot be assumed to possess knowledge of, or be practicing according to, research evidence. Participants indicated that when they made changes in their treatment of patients, they often did so on the basis of research evidence obtained in other ways, but they did not choose ICAs on the basis of their advisor's familiarity with research-based knowledge.

Mild cognitive impairment and dementia in primary care: the value of medical history

BACKGROUND

Primary care should be the place for the early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia; however, a considerable proportion of these processes remain undetected at this setting. Family doctors may not have enough time or expertise for cognitive testing. The utility of clinical variables, other than cognitive tests, has hardly been investigated.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the diagnostic and prognostic value of the variables that are usually collected in the medical history of patients with suspected cognitive impairment.

METHODS

In this cohort study, people aged ≥ 50 years were prospectively searched for cognitive decline of unknown aetiology by seven primary care physicians (PCP) during their practice. The baseline assessment included demographic variables, symptom-related variables, medical and psychiatric co-morbidity, family history of dementia and neurological exam. The diagnosis was made by a neurologist at baseline and after 1 year.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-six patients were analysed of whom 81 (46.0%) had MCI and 18 (10.2%) had dementia at baseline. After 1 year, 8 (9.9%) MCI patients had progressed to dementia, but 48 (59.3%) had reverted to normal cognition. Old age, source of symptoms (informant or PCP), short duration and low education were associated with MCI or dementia at baseline; low education predicted progression to dementia in MCI patients and less chronic medical conditions and younger age predicted reversion from MCI to normal cognition (P < 0.05, adjusted regression models).

CONCLUSION

Clinical data usually collected on medical history by PCP are useful to detect patients with MCI and dementia and also to predict MCI outcome.

Dealing with low-incidence serious diseases in general practice

Cost-effective health care depends on high-quality triage. The most challenging aspect of triage, which GPs confront on a regular basis, is diagnosing rare but serious disease. Failure to shoulder any risk in this situation overloads the health system and subjects patients to unnecessary investigation. Adopting too high a risk threshold leads to missed cases, late diagnosis, and sometimes avoidable death. It also undermines the credibility of primary care practitioners. Quantification of diagnostic risk suggests there is a potential risk gap between the maximum certainty with which GPs can assess the risk of serious disease at presentation and the minimum certainty required by many health systems for further investigation or hospital referral. Physician gut-feeling and diagnostic safety netting are often employed to fill the gap. Neither strategy is well defined or well supported by evidence. It should be possible to reduce the diagnostic risk gap cost-effectively by adopting more explicit diagnostic algorithms and providing better GP access to new diagnostic technologies. It is also essential, given the decreasing experience of triage clinicians employed in a number of countries, that a teachable evidence base is constructed for gut feeling and diagnostic safety netting. However, this construction of an evidence base requires very large-scale studies, and the global primary care research community remains small. The challenge therefore needs to be met by urgent and effective international collaboration.

Gut feelings as a third track in general practitioners' diagnostic reasoning

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) are often faced with complicated, vague problems in situations of uncertainty that they have to solve at short notice. In such situations, gut feelings seem to play a substantial role in their diagnostic process. Qualitative research distinguished a sense of alarm and a sense of reassurance. However, not every GP trusted their gut feelings, since a scientific explanation is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This paper explains how gut feelings arise and function in GPs' diagnostic reasoning.

APPROACH

The paper reviews literature from medical, psychological and neuroscientific perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

Gut feelings in general practice are based on the interaction between patient information and a GP's knowledge and experience. This is visualized in a knowledge-based model of GPs' diagnostic reasoning emphasizing that this complex task combines analytical and non-analytical cognitive processes. The model integrates the two well-known diagnostic reasoning tracks of medical decision-making and medical problem-solving, and adds gut feelings as a third track. Analytical and non-analytical diagnostic reasoning interacts continuously, and GPs use elements of all three tracks, depending on the task and the situation. In this dual process theory, gut feelings emerge as a consequence of non-analytical processing of the available information and knowledge, either reassuring GPs or alerting them that something is wrong and action is required. The role of affect as a heuristic within the physician's knowledge network explains how gut feelings may help GPs to navigate in a mostly efficient way in the often complex and uncertain diagnostic situations of general practice. Emotion research and neuroscientific data support the unmistakable role of affect in the process of making decisions and explain the bodily sensation of gut feelings.The implications for health care practice and medical education are discussed.

The 'sense of alarm' ('gut feeling') in clinical practice. A survey among European general practitioners on recognition and expression

OBJECTIVE

Most general practitioners in the Netherlands and Flanders (Belgium) are familiar with that special feeling during certain consultations: 'There's something wrong here, though I have no specific indications yet'. This 'sense of alarm' alerts the doctor, activates the diagnostic process and induces him to initiate specific management to prevent serious health problems. We wanted to know whether this sense of alarm is a typical phenomenon among Dutch-speaking GPs or is also recognized by GPs elsewhere in Europe.

METHODS

A short questionnaire survey was held among 128 GPs in 28 countries included in the European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN). GPs were asked if they recognized our description of the 'sense of alarm' and if they used a typical phrase in their language to express this uneasy feeling.

RESULTS

We received 30 replies from GPs in 16 European countries, plus Israel and South-Africa. They all recognized our description and 25 GPs reported typical expressions in their own language. The GPs' uneasy feeling was sometimes perceived as a bodily sensation.

CONCLUSION

The 'sense of alarm' is a familiar phenomenon in general practices in Europe. We propose to use the English phrase 'gut feelings' in further research reports.

What do physicians gain (and lose) with experience? Qualitative results from a cross-national study of diabetes

An empirical puzzle has emerged over the last several decades of research on variation in clinical decision making involving mixed effects of physician experience. There is some evidence that physicians with greater experience may provide poorer quality care than their less experienced counterparts, as captured by various quality assurance measures. Physician experience is traditionally narrowly defined as years in practice or age, and there is a need for investigation into precisely what happens to physicians as they gain experience, including the reasoning and clinical skills acquired over time and the ways in which physicians consciously implement those skills into their work. In this study, we are concerned with 1) how physicians conceptualize and describe the meaning of their clinical experience, and 2) how they use their experience in clinical practice. To address these questions, we analyzed qualitative data drawn from in-depth interviews with physicians from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany as a part of a larger factorial experiment of medical decision making for diabetes. Our results show that common measures of physician experience do not fully capture the skills physicians acquire over time or how they implement those skills in their clinical work. We found that what physicians actually gain over time is complex social, behavioral and intuitive wisdom as well as the ability to compare the present day patient against similar past patients. These active cognitive reasoning processes are essential components of a forward-looking research agenda in the area of physician experience and decision making. Guideline-based outcome measures, accompanied by underdeveloped age- and years-based definitions of experience, may prematurely conclude that more experienced physicians are providing deficient care while overlooking the ways in which they are providing more and better care than their less experienced counterparts.

An online tool for investigating clinical decision making

BACKGROUND

Induction of labour is a common clinical intervention. There has been a recent rise in rates of induction of labour and wide variation between published hospital rates without obvious explanation. Clinician variation has been suggested as a reason.

OBJECTIVE

The study described aimed to examine clinical decision making, whilst removing individual patient bias. To achieve this clinical behaviour was studied by the use of imaginary clinical scenarios presented to clinicians by computer. Unlike retrospective audit, the rates thus generated are unaffected by differences in casemix, pressure of time, work or other factors and allow direct comparison between clinicians and comparison with clinical guidelines.

METHODS

Data about 15 imaginary pregnant women are presented to the clinician, each may have symptoms or signs of hypertensive disorders, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) and/or postdates. From the decision made in each scenario, and the information revealed about each scenario, a set of 'decision rules' is created for each clinician, describing in what circumstances they would induce labour. Data from the National Women's Hospital (Auckland, New Zealand) is then examined using these rules and the induction of labour rate thus generated presented to the clinician.

RESULTS

Sixteen clinicians were interviewed. Their induction of labour rate ranged from 10-31%.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician variation in decision making is evident about the intervention when to induce labour. The system is available on the WWW at http://csrs2.aut.ac.nz/scenario

The diagnostic role of gut feelings in general practice. A focus group study of the concept and its determinants

BACKGROUND

General practitioners sometimes base clinical decisions on gut feelings alone, even though there is little evidence of their diagnostic and prognostic value in daily practice. Research into these aspects and the use of the concept in medical education require a practical and valid description of gut feelings. The goal of our study was therefore to describe the concept of gut feelings in general practice and to identify their main determinants

METHODS

Qualitative research including 4 focus group discussions. A heterogeneous sample of 28 GPs. Text analysis of the focus group discussions, using a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

Gut feelings are familiar to most GPs in the Netherlands and play a substantial role in their everyday routine. The participants distinguished two types of gut feelings, a sense of reassurance and a sense of alarm. In the former case, a GP is sure about prognosis and therapy, although they may not always have a clear diagnosis in mind. A sense of alarm means that a GP has the feeling that something is wrong even though objective arguments are lacking. GPs in the focus groups experienced gut feelings as a compass in situations of uncertainty and the majority of GPs trusted this guide. We identified the main determinants of gut feelings: fitting, alerting and interfering factors, sensation, contextual knowledge, medical education, experience and personality.

CONCLUSION

The role of gut feelings in general practice has become much clearer, but we need more research into the contributions of individual determinants and into the test properties of gut feelings to make the concept suitable for medical education.

Barriers to physician adherence to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug guidelines: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Despite wide availability of physician guidelines for safer use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and widespread use of these drugs in the US, NSAID prescribing guidelines have been only modestly effective.

AIM

To identify and describe comprehensively barriers to provider adherence to NSAID prescribing guidelines.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 25 physicians, seeking to identify the major influences explaining physician non-adherence to guidelines. Interviews were standardized and structured probes were used for clarification and detail. All interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Three independent investigators analysed the transcripts, using the constant-comparative method of qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified six dominant physician barriers explaining non-adherence to established NSAID prescribing guidelines. These included (i) lack of familiarity with guidelines, (ii) perceived limited validity of guidelines, (iii) limited applicability of guidelines among specific patients, (iv) clinical inertia, (v) influences of prior anecdotal experiences and (vi) medical heuristics.

CONCLUSIONS

A heterogeneous set of influences are barriers to physician adherence to NSAID prescribing guidelines. Suggested measures for improving guideline-concordant prescribing should focus on measures to improve physician education and confidence in guidelines, implementation of physician/pharmacist co-management strategies and expansion of guideline scope.

Family Practitioners' Diagnostic Decision-Making Processes Regarding Patients with Respiratory Tract Infections: An Observational Study

Background. The influence of patient characteristics on family practitioners' (FPs') diagnostic decision making has mainly been investigated using indirect methods such as vignettes or questionnaires. Direct observation— borrowed from social and cultural anthropology— may be an alternative method for describing FPs' real-life behavior and may help in gaining insight into how FPs diagnose respiratory tract infections, which are frequent in primary care. Objective. To clarify FPs' diagnostic processes when treating patients suffering from symptoms of respiratory tract infection. Methods. This direct observation study was performed in 30 family practices using a checklist for patient complaints, history taking, physical examination, and diagnoses. The influence of patients' symptoms and complaints on the FPs' physical examination and diagnosis was calculated by logistic regression analyses. Dummy variables based on combinations of symptoms and complaints were constructed and tested against saturated (full) and backward regression models. Results. In total, 273 patients (median age 37 years, 51% women) were included. The median number of symptoms described was 4 per patient, and most information was provided at the patients' own initiative. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed a strong association between patients' complaints and the physical examination. Frequent diagnoses were upper respiratory tract infection (URTI)/common cold (43%), bronchitis (26%), sinusitis (12%), and tonsillitis (11%). There were no significant statistical differences between ``simple heuristic'' models and saturated regression models in the diagnoses of bronchitis, sinusitis, and tonsillitis, indicating that simple heuristics are probably used by the FPs, whereas ``URTI/common cold'' was better explained by the full model. Conclusion. FPs tended to make their diagnosis based on a few patient symptoms and a limited physical examination. Simple heuristic models were almost as powerful in explaining most diagnoses as saturated models. Direct observation allowed for the study of decision making under real conditions, yielding both quantitative data and ``qualitative'' information about the FPs' performance. It is important for investigators to be aware of the specific disadvantages of the method (e.g., a possible observer effect).

Patterns of use of handheld clinical decision support tools in the clinical setting

OBJECTIVES

To assess the patterns of use of handheld clinical decision support tools by internal medicine residents in clinical settings.

METHODS

Eighty-two internal medicine residents were given personal digital assistants (PDAs) containing a suite of clinical decision support (CDS) programs. A tracking program was used to prospectively track program use during the study period, and a follow-up survey regarding self-reported program use was administered after the study period. Patterns of program use from the tracking data were compared to the data from the self-report survey.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight residents were followed using the tracking data. Residents used an average of 1.81 CDS programs (SD: 1.57; range, 0-5) per month. Forty-nine residents completed the self-report survey. Residents reported using an average of 3.15 (SD: 1.61) and 3.92 (SD: 1.40) CDS programs during a typical clinic session and inpatient day, respectively. In both inpatient and outpatient settings and for both methods of assessing program use, 2 programs (Epocrates and MedCalc) were used more often than the other programs. No association was observed between age, gender, race, and PGY level with the use of handheld clinical decision support tools for either tracked or self-report data. The self-report data show higher estimates of CDS program use than the tracking data in the clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

The data show that physicians prefer to use certain handheld CDS tools in clinical settings. Drug references and medical calculators have been consistently used more than clinical prediction rules and diagnostic systems. Self-report survey instruments may overestimate recorded use of CDS programs.

[A complex process: decision-making in general practice: 117 structured case analyses]

BACKGROUND

A variety of factors seem to play a role in decision-making in general practice. To describe the complexity of this process a vague symptom with a broad spectrum of possible causes and outcomes was chosen: dizziness. Aim of this study was to provide a conceptual framework to describe and assess the complex reasoning process of general practitioners.

METHODS

22 GPs were interviewed about the patients seeking help for dizziness. The semi-structured focussed interviews were qualitatively analysed by consensus method.

RESULTS

By 117 structured case analyses factors with influence on the decision-making process were identified and assigned to 7 different domains. Concepts described in literature were found as well as less well-known or even not accepted motives.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenced by a variety of parameters, the decision-making process in general practice is complex. It is necessary to be aware of them to be able to deal with them.

Factors influencing repeat caesarean section: qualitative exploratory study of obstetricians' and midwives' accounts

OBJECTIVE

To explore the views of health professionals on the factors influencing repeat caesarean section.

DESIGN

Qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with professionals who care for women in pregnancy and labour.

SETTING

Acute hospital trust with two maternity units and community midwifery service, Leicestershire, UK.

SAMPLE

Twenty-five midwives and doctors.

METHODS

Interviews with professionals were undertaken using a prompt guide. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method, assisted by QSR N5 software.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Identification of factors influencing professional decision making about repeat caesarean section.

RESULTS

Decision making in relation to repeat caesarean is a complex process involving several parties. Professionals identify the relevance of evidence for decision making for repeat caesarean. However, professionals feel that following strict protocols is of limited value because of the perceived substandard quality of evidence in this area, other external pressures and the contingent, unique and often unanticipated features of each case. Professionals also perceive that the organisation of care plays an important role in rates of repeat caesarean.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision making for repeat caesarean is a social practice where standardised protocols may have limited value. Attention needs to be given to the multiple parties involved in the decision-making process. Reflective practice, opinion leadership and role modelling may offer ways forward but will require evaluation.

Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed "mindlines?" Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care

OBJECTIVE

To explore in depth how primary care clinicians (general practitioners and practice nurses) derive their individual and collective healthcare decisions.

DESIGN

Ethnographic study using standard methods (non-participant observation, semistructured interviews, and documentary review) over two years to collect data, which were analysed thematically.

SETTING

Two general practices, one in the south of England and the other in the north of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine doctors, three nurses, one phlebotomist, and associated medical staff in one practice provided the initial data; the emerging model was checked for transferability with general practitioners in the second practice.

RESULTS

Clinicians rarely accessed and used explicit evidence from research or other sources directly, but relied on "mindlines"--collectively reinforced, internalised, tacit guidelines. These were informed by brief reading but mainly by their own and their colleagues' experience, their interactions with each other and with opinion leaders, patients, and pharmaceutical representatives, and other sources of largely tacit knowledge. Mediated by organisational demands and constraints, mindlines were iteratively negotiated with a variety of key actors, often through a range of informal interactions in fluid "communities of practice," resulting in socially constructed "knowledge in practice."

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the potential advantage of exploiting existing formal and informal networking as a key to conveying evidence to clinicians.

The use of CRP tests in patients with respiratory tract infections in primary care in Sweden can be questioned

A diagnosis-antibiotic prescribing study was performed in 5 counties in Sweden during 1 week in November in 2000 and 2002 respectively. As a part of the study, the use and results of C-reactive protein (CRP) tests in relation to duration of symptoms and antibiotic prescribing in 6778 patients assigned a diagnosis of respiratory tract infections were analysed. In almost half (42%) of the patients, a CRP test was performed. The majority of CRP tests (69%) were performed in patients assigned diagnosis upper respiratory tract infection, where the test is not recommended. Overall, there was a minor decrease in antibiotic prescribing when CRP was used (41%), in comparison to 44% of the patients where no CRP was performed (p < 0.01). Patients assigned diagnoses implying a bacterial aetiology were prescribed antibiotics irrespective of result of CRP or length of symptoms before consultation. For patients assigned viral diagnoses, antibiotic prescribing increased with increasing duration of symptoms and increasing value of CRP. The use of CRP decreased antibiotic prescribing in patients assigned to viral diagnoses and with longstanding symptoms (p < 0.001). However, 59% of the patients assigned viral diagnoses with CRP > or = 25 received antibiotics, which seems to indicate a misinterpretation of CRP and a non-optimal use of antibiotics.

Use of rules of thumb in the consultation in general practice--an act of balance between the individual and the general perspective

BACKGROUND

Rules of thumb used by GPs could be considered as empirical evidence of intuition and a link between science and practice in general practice.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to analyse the description of the application of rules of thumb with regard to different situations in general practice.

METHODS

An explorative and descriptive study was started with focus group interviews. Four groups with 23 GPs were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed and analysed, and the rules and their application were classified by an editing analysis.

RESULTS

A specific set of rules of thumb was used for rapid assessment, when emergency and psychosocial problems were identified. When the main focus of the problems was identified as somatic or psychosocial, the GPs did not disregard the other aspects but described the use of rules in a simultaneous individualizing and generalizing process. The rules contained probability reasoning and risk assessment.

CONCLUSION

Rules of thumb seemed to serve as a link between theoretical knowledge and practical experience and were used by the GPs in an act of balance between the individual and the general perspective.