Cargando…

Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making

BACKGROUND: Physician non-compliance with clinical practice guidelines remains a critical barrier to high quality care. Serious games (using gaming technology for serious purposes) have emerged as a method of studying physician decision making. However, little is known about their validity. METHODS:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mohan, Deepika, Angus, Derek C., Ricketts, Daniel, Farris, Coreen, Fischhoff, Baruch, Rosengart, Matthew R., Yealy, Donald M., Barnato, Amber E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4143260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25153149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105445
_version_ 1782331872583352320
author Mohan, Deepika
Angus, Derek C.
Ricketts, Daniel
Farris, Coreen
Fischhoff, Baruch
Rosengart, Matthew R.
Yealy, Donald M.
Barnato, Amber E.
author_facet Mohan, Deepika
Angus, Derek C.
Ricketts, Daniel
Farris, Coreen
Fischhoff, Baruch
Rosengart, Matthew R.
Yealy, Donald M.
Barnato, Amber E.
author_sort Mohan, Deepika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Physician non-compliance with clinical practice guidelines remains a critical barrier to high quality care. Serious games (using gaming technology for serious purposes) have emerged as a method of studying physician decision making. However, little is known about their validity. METHODS: We created a serious game and evaluated its construct validity. We used the decision context of trauma triage in the Emergency Department of non-trauma centers, given widely accepted guidelines that recommend the transfer of severely injured patients to trauma centers. We designed cases with the premise that the representativeness heuristic influences triage (i.e. physicians make transfer decisions based on archetypes of severely injured patients rather than guidelines). We randomized a convenience sample of emergency medicine physicians to a control or cognitive load arm, and compared performance (disposition decisions, number of orders entered, time spent per case). We hypothesized that cognitive load would increase the use of heuristics, increasing the transfer of representative cases and decreasing the transfer of non-representative cases. FINDINGS: We recruited 209 physicians, of whom 168 (79%) began and 142 (68%) completed the task. Physicians transferred 31% of severely injured patients during the game, consistent with rates of transfer for severely injured patients in practice. They entered the same average number of orders in both arms (control (C): 10.9 [SD 4.8] vs. cognitive load (CL):10.7 [SD 5.6], p = 0.74), despite spending less time per case in the control arm (C: 9.7 [SD 7.1] vs. CL: 11.7 [SD 6.7] minutes, p<0.01). Physicians were equally likely to transfer representative cases in the two arms (C: 45% vs. CL: 34%, p = 0.20), but were more likely to transfer non-representative cases in the control arm (C: 38% vs. CL: 26%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We found that physicians made decisions consistent with actual practice, that we could manipulate cognitive load, and that load increased the use of heuristics, as predicted by cognitive theory.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4143260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41432602014-08-27 Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making Mohan, Deepika Angus, Derek C. Ricketts, Daniel Farris, Coreen Fischhoff, Baruch Rosengart, Matthew R. Yealy, Donald M. Barnato, Amber E. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Physician non-compliance with clinical practice guidelines remains a critical barrier to high quality care. Serious games (using gaming technology for serious purposes) have emerged as a method of studying physician decision making. However, little is known about their validity. METHODS: We created a serious game and evaluated its construct validity. We used the decision context of trauma triage in the Emergency Department of non-trauma centers, given widely accepted guidelines that recommend the transfer of severely injured patients to trauma centers. We designed cases with the premise that the representativeness heuristic influences triage (i.e. physicians make transfer decisions based on archetypes of severely injured patients rather than guidelines). We randomized a convenience sample of emergency medicine physicians to a control or cognitive load arm, and compared performance (disposition decisions, number of orders entered, time spent per case). We hypothesized that cognitive load would increase the use of heuristics, increasing the transfer of representative cases and decreasing the transfer of non-representative cases. FINDINGS: We recruited 209 physicians, of whom 168 (79%) began and 142 (68%) completed the task. Physicians transferred 31% of severely injured patients during the game, consistent with rates of transfer for severely injured patients in practice. They entered the same average number of orders in both arms (control (C): 10.9 [SD 4.8] vs. cognitive load (CL):10.7 [SD 5.6], p = 0.74), despite spending less time per case in the control arm (C: 9.7 [SD 7.1] vs. CL: 11.7 [SD 6.7] minutes, p<0.01). Physicians were equally likely to transfer representative cases in the two arms (C: 45% vs. CL: 34%, p = 0.20), but were more likely to transfer non-representative cases in the control arm (C: 38% vs. CL: 26%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We found that physicians made decisions consistent with actual practice, that we could manipulate cognitive load, and that load increased the use of heuristics, as predicted by cognitive theory. Public Library of Science 2014-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4143260/ /pubmed/25153149 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105445 Text en © 2014 Mohan et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mohan, Deepika
Angus, Derek C.
Ricketts, Daniel
Farris, Coreen
Fischhoff, Baruch
Rosengart, Matthew R.
Yealy, Donald M.
Barnato, Amber E.
Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title_full Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title_fullStr Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title_short Assessing the Validity of Using Serious Game Technology to Analyze Physician Decision Making
title_sort assessing the validity of using serious game technology to analyze physician decision making
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4143260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25153149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105445
work_keys_str_mv AT mohandeepika assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT angusderekc assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT rickettsdaniel assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT farriscoreen assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT fischhoffbaruch assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT rosengartmatthewr assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT yealydonaldm assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking
AT barnatoambere assessingthevalidityofusingseriousgametechnologytoanalyzephysiciandecisionmaking