Cargando…

Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic error is a major source of patient suffering. Researchshows that physicians experience frequent interruptions while being engaged with patients and indicate that diagnostic accuracy may be impaired as a result. Since most studies in the field are observational, there is as yet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alajaji, Mai, Saleh, Nada, AlKhulaif, Ali Hassan, Mamede, Silvia, Rotgans, Jerome I., Sukkarieh, Hatouf, AlHarbi, Nouf, Magzoub, Mohi Eldin, Schmidt, Henk G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8925158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35296302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03212-1
_version_ 1784670010304626688
author Alajaji, Mai
Saleh, Nada
AlKhulaif, Ali Hassan
Mamede, Silvia
Rotgans, Jerome I.
Sukkarieh, Hatouf
AlHarbi, Nouf
Magzoub, Mohi Eldin
Schmidt, Henk G.
author_facet Alajaji, Mai
Saleh, Nada
AlKhulaif, Ali Hassan
Mamede, Silvia
Rotgans, Jerome I.
Sukkarieh, Hatouf
AlHarbi, Nouf
Magzoub, Mohi Eldin
Schmidt, Henk G.
author_sort Alajaji, Mai
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Diagnostic error is a major source of patient suffering. Researchshows that physicians experience frequent interruptions while being engaged with patients and indicate that diagnostic accuracy may be impaired as a result. Since most studies in the field are observational, there is as yet no evidence suggesting a direct causal link between being interrupted and diagnostic error. Theexperiments reported in this article were intended to assess this hypothesis. METHODS: Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that interruptions hurt diagnostic reasoning and increase time on task. In the first experiment (N = 42), internal medicine residents, while diagnosing vignettes of actual clinical cases were interrupted halfway with a task unrelated to medicine, solving word-spotting puzzles and anagrams. In the second experiment (N = 78), the interruptions were medically relevant ones. In the third experiment (N = 30), we put additional time pressure on the participants. In all these experiments, a control group diagnosed the cases without interruption. Dependent variables were diagnostic accuracy and amount of time spent on the vignettes. RESULTS: In none of the experiments interruptions were demonstrated to influence diagnostic accuracy. In Experiment 1: Mean of interrupted group was 0.88 (SD = 0.37) versus non- interrupted group 0.91 (SD = 0.32). In Experiment 2: Mean of interrupted group was 0.95 (SD = 0.32) versus non-interrupted group 0.94 (SD = 0.38). In Experiment 3: Mean of interrupted group was 0.42 (SD = 0.12) versus non-interrupted group 0.37 (SD = 0.08). Although interrupted residents in all experiments needed more time to complete the diagnostic task, only in Experiment 2, this effect was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These three experiments, taken together, failed to demonstrate negative effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning. Perhaps physicians who are interrupted may still have sufficient cognitive resources available to recover from it most of the time.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8925158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89251582022-03-23 Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments Alajaji, Mai Saleh, Nada AlKhulaif, Ali Hassan Mamede, Silvia Rotgans, Jerome I. Sukkarieh, Hatouf AlHarbi, Nouf Magzoub, Mohi Eldin Schmidt, Henk G. BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: Diagnostic error is a major source of patient suffering. Researchshows that physicians experience frequent interruptions while being engaged with patients and indicate that diagnostic accuracy may be impaired as a result. Since most studies in the field are observational, there is as yet no evidence suggesting a direct causal link between being interrupted and diagnostic error. Theexperiments reported in this article were intended to assess this hypothesis. METHODS: Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that interruptions hurt diagnostic reasoning and increase time on task. In the first experiment (N = 42), internal medicine residents, while diagnosing vignettes of actual clinical cases were interrupted halfway with a task unrelated to medicine, solving word-spotting puzzles and anagrams. In the second experiment (N = 78), the interruptions were medically relevant ones. In the third experiment (N = 30), we put additional time pressure on the participants. In all these experiments, a control group diagnosed the cases without interruption. Dependent variables were diagnostic accuracy and amount of time spent on the vignettes. RESULTS: In none of the experiments interruptions were demonstrated to influence diagnostic accuracy. In Experiment 1: Mean of interrupted group was 0.88 (SD = 0.37) versus non- interrupted group 0.91 (SD = 0.32). In Experiment 2: Mean of interrupted group was 0.95 (SD = 0.32) versus non-interrupted group 0.94 (SD = 0.38). In Experiment 3: Mean of interrupted group was 0.42 (SD = 0.12) versus non-interrupted group 0.37 (SD = 0.08). Although interrupted residents in all experiments needed more time to complete the diagnostic task, only in Experiment 2, this effect was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These three experiments, taken together, failed to demonstrate negative effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning. Perhaps physicians who are interrupted may still have sufficient cognitive resources available to recover from it most of the time. BioMed Central 2022-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8925158/ /pubmed/35296302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03212-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Alajaji, Mai
Saleh, Nada
AlKhulaif, Ali Hassan
Mamede, Silvia
Rotgans, Jerome I.
Sukkarieh, Hatouf
AlHarbi, Nouf
Magzoub, Mohi Eldin
Schmidt, Henk G.
Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title_full Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title_fullStr Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title_full_unstemmed Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title_short Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
title_sort failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8925158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35296302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03212-1
work_keys_str_mv AT alajajimai failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT salehnada failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT alkhulaifalihassan failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT mamedesilvia failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT rotgansjeromei failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT sukkariehhatouf failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT alharbinouf failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT magzoubmohieldin failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments
AT schmidthenkg failuretodemonstrateeffectsofinterruptionsondiagnosticreasoningthreeexperiments