Pressure injury risk assessment and prescription of preventative interventions using a structured tool versus clinical judgement: An interrater agreement study

AIM

To assess agreement of pressure injury risk level and differences in preventative intervention prescription between nurses using a structured risk assessment tool compared with clinical judgement.

DESIGN

Interrater agreement study.

METHODS

Data were collected from November 2019 to December 2022. Paired nurse-assessors were allocated randomly to independently assess pressure injury risk using a structured tool (incorporating the Waterlow Score), or clinical judgement; then prescribe preventative interventions. Assessments were conducted on 150 acute patient participants in a general tertiary hospital. Agreement of risk level was analysed using absolute agreement proportions, weighted kappa and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa.

RESULTS

Ninety-four nurse assessors participated. Absolute agreement of not-at-risk versus at-risk-any-level was substantial, but absolute agreement of risk-level was only fair. Clinical judgement assessors tended to underestimate risk. Where risk level was agreed, prescribed intervention frequencies were similar, although structured tool assessors prescribed more interventions mandated by standard care, while clinical judgement assessors prescribed more additional/optional interventions. Structured tool assessors prescribed more interventions targeted at lower-risk patients, whereas assessors using clinical judgement prescribed more interventions targeted at higher-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

There were clear differences in pressure injury risk-level assessment between nurses using the two methods, with important differences in intervention prescription frequencies found. Further research is required into the use of both structured tools and clinical judgement to assess pressure injury risk, with emphasis on the impact of risk assessments on subsequent preventative intervention implementation.

IMPACT

The results of this study are important for clinical practice as they demonstrate the influence of using a structured pressure injury risk assessment tool compared to clinical judgement. Whilst further research is required into the use of both structured tools and clinical judgement to assess pressure injury risk and prescribe interventions, our findings do not support a change in practice that would exclude the use of a structured pressure injury risk assessment tool.

REPORTING METHOD

This study adhered to the GRRAS reporting guideline.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public involvement in this study.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Educators and researchers can use the findings to guide teaching about pressure injury risk assessment and preventative intervention and to direct future studies. For clinical nurses and patients, a change in clinical practice that would exclude the use of a structured risk assessment tool is not recommended and further work is needed to validate the role of clinical judgement to assess risk and its impact on preventative intervention.

Exploring the integration of diagnostic musculoskeletal ultrasound imaging into clinical practice by physical therapists

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK-US) use for diagnostic purposes is expanding in physical therapy practice. Identifying and describing physical therapy-specific approaches to incorporating MSK-US into the evaluation process is needed. Musculoskeletal ultrasound extends the physical exam to allow clinicians to visualize anatomy and pathophysiology both statically and dynamically. Purpose: To document 1) weekly use of diagnostic MSK-US; and 2) clinical reasoning approach used in challenging patient cases by physical therapists (PTs) registered by Inteleos in musculoskeletal sonography (RMSK-certified).

METHODS

Longitudinal, observational, cohort study using mixed methods for data collection and analysis. All 23 currently RMSK-certified PTs using MSK-US in clinical practice across the United States were contacted, and 16 participated. Data were collected using an online survey created with the Research Electronic Data Capture System. Participants documented MSK-US clinical use and significant cases using weekly, reflective, online journals for three months. Demographic data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Case data were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Participating RMSK-certified PTs performed 1110 MSK-US examinations over 110 weeks. Clinicians averaged 7 (range 1-25) MSK-US examinations weekly, representing 28% of an average caseload. Examinations contributed significant anatomical/ pathological information 100% of the time. The most common joints scanned were the knee (n = 281), shoulder (n = 254), and wrist (n = 228). Case data revealed three themes: 1) augmenting the clinical evaluation to extend or narrow a diagnosis; 2) outcomes guiding action; and 3) lessons learned from clinical findings.

CONCLUSION

RMSK-certified PTs regularly used MSK-US to validate and refine their clinical diagnoses and treatment. Ultrasound imaging directly influenced patient care by informing the diagnostic process, guiding treatment, and appropriately identifying referrals.

Challenges Addressing Lung Cancer Screening for Patients With Multimorbidity in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Many individuals who are eligible for lung cancer screening have comorbid conditions complicating their shared decision-making conversations with physicians. The goal of our study was to better understand how primary care physicians (PCPs) factor comorbidities into their evaluation of the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening and into their shared decision-making conversations with patients.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews by videoconference with 15 PCPs to assess the extent of shared decision-making practices and explore their understanding of the intersection of comorbidities and lung cancer screening, and how that understanding informed their clinical approach to this population.

RESULTS

We identified 3 themes. The first theme was whether to discuss or not to discuss lung cancer screening. PCPs described taking additional steps for individuals with complex comorbidities to decide whether to initiate this discussion and used subjective clinical judgment to decide whether the conversation would be productive and beneficial. PCPs made mental assessments that factored in the patient's health, life expectancy, quality of life, and access to support systems. The second theme was that shared decision making is not a simple discussion. When PCPs did initiate discussions about lung cancer screening, although some believed they could provide objective information, others struggled with personal biases. The third theme was that ultimately, the decision to be screened was up to the patient. Patients had the final say, even if their decision was discordant with the PCP's advice.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making conversations about lung cancer screening differed substantially from the standard for patients with complex comorbidities. Future research should include efforts to characterize the risks and benefits of LCS in patients with comorbidities to inform guidelines and clinical application.

Integrating Discussions on Racism and Health Equity into Clinical Reasoning Conference

OBJECTIVE

Intentionally discussing racism and health equity in clinical reasoning conference may provide an opportunity to reinforce antiracist praxis. We aimed to understand 1) whether these discussions provide a meaningful opportunity to practice applying an antiracist lens in patient care, 2) the feasibility of implementing these discussions in a clinical reasoning format, and 3) the acceptability to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and white residents.

METHODS

In 2021, 4 clinical reasoning conference pilot sessions were implemented in a pediatrics residency program. Trained faculty facilitated discussions on mitigating inequity in clinical cases. Residents who attended at least 1 session were invited to participate in focus groups, which were analyzed using grounded theory.

RESULTS

Thirty residents attended each pilot session out of the 30 to 35 who had the opportunity to attend. The focus groups included 6 BIPOC and 6 white residents. The discussions offered a meaningful opportunity to practice recognizing and naming racism. Having faculty facilitators made the discussions more feasible. Both groups experienced benefits and wanted the discussions to continue, but BIPOC residents want more engagement from their white peers.

CONCLUSIONS

Discussing racism and health equity in clinical reasoning conference was a meaningful, feasible, and acceptable opportunity for antiracist praxis.

Exploring clinical reasoning in child language assessment through decoloniality

PURPOSE

Clinical reasoning has been taught, practised, and researched under Western epistemologies, which have been fallible in addressing the complexity of clinical reasoning within Indigenous cultures and societies. We explored how speech-language pathologists in Sri Lanka negotiate and value Indigenous and Western perspectives in clinical reasoning within a decolonial framework.

METHOD

This study used participatory research methodology within the decolonised qualitative research paradigm to produce data collaboratively with eight Sri Lankan speech-language pathologists. Oral history narratives and object-based textual reflections generated the necessary data for the study. Systematic visual-textual analysis and reflexive thematic analysis were carried out iteratively, and the data analysis and interpretation were undertaken collaboratively with the participants.

RESULT

We generated four key themes about professional education, individuality in practice, holistic thinking, and balancing interests and priorities. The results demonstrate that social, political, and economic forces impact practitioners' clinical reasoning.

CONCLUSION

Practising science in its original form within Indigenous contexts is challenging. Colonial roots and imperialism impact the delivery of appropriate services in socially and politically marginalised communities. Practitioners' self-awareness about authentic identities and practical wisdom can develop culturally relevant knowledge for equitable practice.

FRAMED: a framework facilitating insight problem solving

Insight has been studied as an element of problem solving in the field of cognitive psychology and may play an important role in clinical reasoning. We propose a new strategy based on theories that promote insight that may help generate further diagnostic hypotheses by reviewing the interpretation of a case and an individual's list of differential diagnoses from multiple perspectives: formation (F), re-encoding (R), analogy (A), modification (M), elaboration (E), and deliberation (D) (FRAMED). The FRAMED strategy may help clinicians overcome misinterpretations and cognitive bias by systematically reflecting on previous clinical reasoning processes from multiple perspectives.

Assessing clinical reasoning skills following a virtual patient dizziness curriculum

OBJECTIVES

Dizziness is a common medical symptom that is frequently misdiagnosed. While virtual patient (VP) education has been shown to improve diagnostic accuracy for dizziness as assessed by VPs, trainee performance has not been assessed on human subjects. The study aimed to assess whether internal medicine (IM) interns after training on a VP-based dizziness curriculum using a deliberate practice framework would demonstrate improved clinical reasoning when assessed in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE).

METHODS

All available interns volunteered and were randomized 2:1 to intervention (VP education) vs. control (standard clinical teaching) groups. This quasi-experimental study was conducted at one academic medical center from January to May 2021. Both groups completed pre-posttest VP case assessments (scored as correct diagnosis across six VP cases) and participated in an OSCE done 6 weeks later. The OSCEs were recorded and assessed using a rubric that was systematically developed and validated.

RESULTS

Out of 21 available interns, 20 participated. Between intervention (n=13) and control (n=7), mean pretest VP diagnostic accuracy scores did not differ; the posttest VP scores improved for the intervention group (3.5 [SD 1.3] vs. 1.6 [SD 0.8], p=0.007). On the OSCE, the means scores were higher in the intervention (n=11) compared to control group (n=4) for physical exam (8.4 [SD 4.6] vs. 3.9 [SD 4.0], p=0.003) and total rubric score (43.4 [SD 12.2] vs. 32.6 [SD 11.3], p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The VP-based dizziness curriculum resulted in improved diagnostic accuracy among IM interns with enhanced physical exam skills retained at 6 weeks post-intervention.

Factors influencing diagnostic accuracy among intensive care unit clinicians - an observational study

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic errors are a source of morbidity and mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, contextual factors influencing clinicians' diagnostic performance have not been studied in authentic ICU settings. We sought to determine the accuracy of ICU clinicians' diagnostic impressions and to characterize how various contextual factors, including self-reported stress levels and perceptions about the patient's prognosis and complexity, impact diagnostic accuracy. We also explored diagnostic calibration, i.e. the balance of accuracy and confidence, among ICU clinicians.

METHODS

We conducted an observational cohort study in an academic medical ICU. Between June and August 2019, we interviewed ICU clinicians during routine care about their patients' diagnoses, their confidence, and other contextual factors. Subsequently, using adjudicated final diagnoses as the reference standard, two investigators independently rated clinicians' diagnostic accuracy and on each patient on a given day ("patient-day") using 5-point Likert scales. We conducted analyses using both restrictive and conservative definitions of clinicians' accuracy based on the two reviewers' ratings of accuracy.

RESULTS

We reviewed clinicians' responses for 464 unique patient-days, which included 255 total patients. Attending physicians had the greatest diagnostic accuracy (77-90 %, rated as three or higher on 5-point Likert scale) followed by the team's primary fellow (73-88 %). Attending physician and fellows were also least affected by contextual factors. Diagnostic calibration was greatest among ICU fellows.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional studies are needed to better understand how contextual factors influence different clinicians' diagnostic reasoning in the ICU.

Clinical reasoning during dysphagia assessment and management in acute care: A longitudinal qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Competent clinical reasoning forms the foundation for effective and efficient clinical swallowing examination (CSE) and consequent dysphagia management decisions. While the nature of initial CSEs has been evaluated, it remains unclear how new information gathered by speech-language therapists (SLTs) throughout a patient's acute-care journey is integrated into their initial clinical reasoning and management processes and used to review and revise initial management recommendations.

AIMS

To understand how SLTs' clinical reasoning and decision-making regarding dysphagia assessment and management evolve as patients transition through acute hospital care from referral to discharge.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A longitudinal, qualitative approach was employed to gather information from two SLTs who managed six patients at a metropolitan acute-care hospital. A retrospective 'think-aloud' protocol was utilized to prompt SLTs regarding their clinical reasoning and decision-making processes during initial and subsequent CSEs and patient interactions. Three types of concept maps were created based on these interviews: a descriptive concept map, a reasoning map and a hypothesis map. All concept maps were evaluated regarding their overall structure, facts gathered, types of reasoning engaged in (inductive versus deductive), types of hypotheses generated, and the diagnosis and management recommendations made following initial CSE and during subsequent dysphagia management.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Initial CSEs involved a rich process of fact-gathering, that was predominantly led by inductive reasoning (hypothesis generation) and some application of deductive reasoning (hypothesis testing), with the primary aims of determining the presence of dysphagia and identifying the safest diet and fluid recommendations. During follow-up assessments, SLTs engaged in increasingly more deductive testing of initial hypotheses, including fact-gathering aimed at determining the tolerance of current diet and fluid recommendations or the suitability for diet and/or fluid upgrade and less inductive reasoning. Consistent with this aim, SLTs' hypotheses were focused primarily on airway protection and medical status during the follow-up phase. Overall, both initial and follow-up swallowing assessments were targeted primarily at identifying suitable management recommendations, and less so on identifying and formulating diagnoses. None of the patients presented with adverse respiratory and/or swallowing outcomes during admission and following discharge from speech pathology.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Swallowing assessment and management across the acute-care journey was observed as a high-quality, patient-centred process characterized by iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning. This approach appears to maximize efficiency without compromising the quality of care. The outcomes of this research encourage further investigation and translation to tertiary and post-professional education contexts as a clear understanding of the processes involved in reaching diagnoses and management recommendations can inform career-long refinement of clinical skills.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject SLTs' clinical reasoning processes during initial CSE employ iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning, reflecting a patient-centred assessment process. To date it is unknown how SLTs engage in clinical reasoning during follow-up assessments of swallowing function, how they assess the appropriateness of initial management recommendations and how this relates to patient outcomes. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge Our longitudinal evaluation of clinical reasoning and decision-making patterns related to swallowing management in acute care demonstrated that SLTs tailored their processes to each patient's presentation. There was an emphasis on monitoring the suitability of the initial management recommendations and the potential for upgrade of diet or compensatory swallowing strategies. The iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning reflect efficient decision-making processes that maintain high-quality clinical care within the acute environment. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Employing efficient and high-quality clinical reasoning is a hallmark of good dysphagia practice in maximizing positive patient outcomes. Developing approaches to understanding and making explicit clinical reasoning processes of experienced clinicians may assist SLTs of all developmental stages to provide high standards of care.

The Impact of Script Concordance Testing on Clinical Decision-Making in Paramedic Education

This study investigates the effectiveness of the Script Concordance Test (SCT) in enhancing clinical reasoning skills within paramedic education. Focusing on the Medical University of Lublin, we evaluated the SCT's application across two cohorts of paramedic students, aiming to understand its potential to improve decision-making skills in emergency scenarios. Our approach, informed by Van der Vleuten's assessment framework, revealed that while the SCT's correlation with traditional methods like multiple-choice questions (MCQs) was limited, its formative nature significantly contributed to improved performance in summative assessments. These findings suggest that the SCT can be an effective tool in paramedic training, particularly in strengthening cognitive abilities critical for emergency responses. The study underscores the importance of incorporating innovative assessment tools like SCTs in paramedic curricula, not only to enhance clinical reasoning but also to prepare students for effective emergency responses. Our research contributes to the ongoing efforts in refining paramedic education and highlights the need for versatile assessment strategies in preparing future healthcare professionals for diverse clinical challenges.

Impact of reference panel composition on scores of script concordance test assessing basic nephrology knowledge in undergraduate medical education

PURPOSE

In the assessment of basic medical knowledge, the composition of the reference panel between specialists and primary care (PC) physicians is a contentious issue. We assessed the effect of panel composition on the scores of undergraduate medical students in a script concordance test (SCT).

METHODS

The scale of an SCT on basic nephrology knowledge was set by a panel of nephrologists or a mixed panel of nephrologists and PC physicians. The results of the SCTs were compared with ANOVA for repeated measurements. Concordance was assessed with Bland and Altman plots.

RESULTS

Forty-five students completed the SCT. Their scores differed according to panel composition: 65.6 ± 9.73/100 points for nephrologists, and 70.27 ± 8.82 for the mixed panel, p < 0.001. Concordance between the scores was low with a bias of -4.27 ± 2.19 and a 95% limit of agreement of -8.96 to -0.38. Panel composition led to a change in the ranking of 71% of students (mean 3.6 ± 2.6 places).

CONCLUSION

The composition of the reference panel, either specialist or mixed, for SCT assessment of basic knowledge has an impact on test results and student rankings.

Verbal Probability Terms for Communicating Clinical Risk - a Systematic Review

Verbal probability expressions such as 'likely' and 'possible' are commonly used to communicate uncertainty in diagnosis, treatment effectiveness as well as the risk of adverse events. Probability terms that are interpreted consistently can be used to standardize risk communication. A systematic review was conducted. Research studies that evaluated numeric meanings of probability terms were reviewed. Terms with consistent numeric interpretation across studies were selected and were used to construct a Visual Risk Scale. Five probability terms showed reliable interpretation by laypersons and healthcare professionals in empirical studies. 'Very Likely' was interpreted as 90% chance (range 80 to 95%); 'Likely/Probable,' 70% (60 to 80%); 'Possible,' 40% (30 to 60%); 'Unlikely,' 20% (10 to 30%); and 'Very Unlikely' with 10% chance (5% to 15%). The corresponding frequency terms were: Very Frequently, Frequently, Often, Infrequently, and Rarely, respectively. Probability terms should be presented with their corresponding numeric ranges during discussions with patients. Numeric values should be presented as X-in-100 natural frequency statements, even for low values; and not as percentages, X-in-1000, X-in-Y, odds, fractions, 1-in-X, or as number needed to treat (NNT). A Visual Risk Scale was developed for use in clinical shared decision making.

Clinical Reasoning: Perspectives of Expert Clinicians on Reasoning Through Complex Clinical Cases

Introduction Clinical reasoning is a core skill for physicians; most doctors do not attain the level of expertise associated with that of an expert clinician (EC). The purpose of this study is to identify the clinical reasoning strategies ECs prioritize when reasoning through complex cases. Methods We interviewed 14 ECs and performed a thematic analysis to identify strategies ECs prioritize when reasoning through complex clinical cases. The authors chose ECs based on the recognition of clinical and teaching expertise by trainees and other faculty members (ECs within our institution) and institutional recognition of high achievement in medicine and medical education (ECs outside our institution). We used a semi-structured guide to interview each EC, then reviewed and coded the interview transcriptions. We developed themes based on agreements between all transcript reviewers.  Results We interviewed 11 male and three female ECs, one from outside the study institution. Two (14%) ECs were primary care physicians, and the remaining were sub-specialists. The authors organized strategies for clinical reasoning through complex cases around four themes, which were as follows: (1) connecting clinical reasoning to patient context; (2) embracing uncertainty, then reducing it; (3) returning to the patient's bedside; and (4) remaining humble to limit diagnostic errors. Conclusion Clinical reasoning is a core clinical skill of physicians, and this article describes clinical reasoning strategies prioritized by ECs for complex clinical cases. Recognition and integration of these strategies into medical training and clinical educator practice may facilitate the evolution of clinical reasoning skills and reduce diagnostic errors.

Integrating Patient Involvement Interventions within Clinical Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study of Health Care Professional Reasoning

Background. Patient involvement interventions are complex interventions that improve patient involvement in treatment and care in health care systems. Studies report several benefits of patient involvement interventions and that health care professionals are positive about using them. However, they have not been explored as a collected group of interventions throughout the continuum of care and treatment. In addition, the relationship between patient involvement interventions and the clinical reasoning process of health care professionals has not been thoroughly studied. Design. This mixed-methods study was conducted at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark between April and November 2022 using interview data from 12 health care professionals and survey data from 420 health care professionals. Informants were medical doctors, nurses, midwives, dietitians, physiotherapists, and occupational therapists who had direct contact with patients during their daily care and treatment. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were analyzed via inductive and deductive content analysis. Results. Communication and interaction were seen as overarching aspects of patient involvement, with patient involvement interventions being defined as concrete tools and methods to enhance health care professionals' explicit clinical reasoning process. Limitations. It is unclear if results are representative of all health care professionals at the hospital or only those with a positive view of patient involvement interventions. Conclusions. Patient involvement interventions are viewed as beneficial for patients and fit with the clinical reasoning of health care professionals. Clinical reasoning may be an active ingredient in the development and implementation of patient involvement interventions. Implications. In practice, health care professionals need training in person-centered communication and the ability to articulate their clinical reasoning explicitly. In research, a more in-depth understanding of the interrelations between patient involvement interventions and clinical reasoning is needed.

Highlights

Communication and interaction are the fundamental goals of patient involvement in practice, regardless of which patient involvement intervention is being used.Clinical reasoning is often an unconscious process using tacit knowledge, but the use of patient involvement interventions may be a way for health care professionals (at both individual and group levels) to become more explicit about and aware of their reflections.Clinical reasoning can be viewed as a mechanism of change in the development and implementation of patient involvement interventions.

Psychometric properties of the persian version of the nursing clinical reasoning scale

AIM

The aim of this study was to translate the Nursing Clinical Reasoning Scale (NCRS) into Persian and evaluate its psychometric properties.

DESIGN

This study was a methodological and cross-sectional study.

METHODS

This methodological study was conducted in 2020 in a teaching hospital. After obtaining necessary permission from its developers, NCRS was translated into Persian through the method proposed by the World Health Organization. Then, its face, content, and construct validity and reliability were assessed. For construct validity assessment through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, 300 nurses (two 150-nurse samples), who had randomly been selected, completed the instrument. Reliability also assessed through the internal consistency and the stability methods. Data were analysed using the SPSS (v. 20.0) and the AMOS (v. 5.0) software.

RESULTS

The content validity indices of NCRS and its items were 0.97 and more than 0.79, respectively. Exploratory factor analysis revealed an assessment and confirmation factor and an implementation and reflection factor for the scale which together explained 57.30% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis also confirmed this two-factor structure (χ2 /df = 2.11, NNFI = 0.952, RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.91, GFI = 0.94, IFI = 0.95, and NFI = 0.96). The Cronbach's alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient values of the scale were 0.96 and 0.94, respectively.

PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The Persian NCRS can help nursing policy makers and mentors identify the need for developing nurses' and nursing students' CR skills and implement need-based educational courses to improve these skills. Moreover, it helps determine whether the educational programmes are effective in improving nurses' CR skills and clinical competence.

Ewing's sarcoma in a young man mimicking lateral elbow pain: A case report with 2 years follow-up

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Lateral elbow pain represents a common musculoskeletal disorder, mostly non-specific and benign. In rare cases, it can be the first symptom of a severe disease such as Ewing's sarcoma (ES). ES is the second most common primary malignant bone tumor in the young population, with a high probability of an unfavourable prognosis.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case report presents the history of a young man presenting to the physical therapist with a diagnosis of "epicondylitis" in the right elbow, which was later revealed to be an aggressive ES of the ulna. Findings raising clinical doubts were (a) constant pain even at night and not dependent on load, (b) significant loss of function, (c) patient's young age, and (d) a palpable mass in the elbow.

RESULTS

After diagnosis, the patient received medical (chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery) and a rehabilitation program. After treatment, the patient improved elbow function, decreased disability and returned to social participation, maintaining positive outcomes at the 2-year follow-up.

DISCUSSION

In summary, this case report emphasizes the importance of differential diagnosis and screening for referral of red flags in physical therapy. Moreover, it describes the rehabilitation of a patient with ES, enriching the scientific literature in the field.

Occupational therapists' experiences of working with people with dementia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Dementia is an age-related disease associated with complex health and care needs. Due to demographical shifts, the number of older people with dementia is forecasted to increase. Occupational therapists encounter people with dementia in their daily work, yet little is known about their experience of working with people with dementia.

AIM/OBJECTIVES

To explore occupational therapist's experiences of working with people with dementia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten occupational therapists were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The results are presented in five different themes: Working with persons who do not recognise decline in their abilities; Saving-face of the person in assessment situations; Facilitating continued engagement in everyday activities; Utilising information provided by care staff; Balancing different preferences on how to proceed.

CONCLUSION

Occupational therapists perceive a need in their work to employ various face-saving strategies and facilitate engagement in everyday activities. The results are exploratory and additionally research is needed to understand the therapists' experiences of working with persons with dementia.

SIGNIFICANCE

Everyday activities should be tailored to the person's abilities, with an emphasis on facilitating the person in carrying them out rather than the social environment taking them over.

Teaching Strategies for Developing Clinical Reasoning Skills in Nursing Students: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical reasoning (CR) is a holistic and recursive cognitive process. It allows nursing students to accurately perceive patients' situations and choose the best course of action among the available alternatives. This study aimed to identify the randomised controlled trials studies in the literature that concern clinical reasoning in the context of nursing students.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) was performed to identify relevant studies published up to October 2023. The following inclusion criteria were examined: (a) clinical reasoning, clinical judgment, and critical thinking in nursing students as a primary study aim; (b) articles published for the last eleven years; (c) research conducted between January 2012 and September 2023; (d) articles published only in English and Spanish; and (e) Randomised Clinical Trials. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool was utilised to appraise all included studies.

RESULTS

Fifteen papers were analysed. Based on the teaching strategies used in the articles, two groups have been identified: simulation methods and learning programs. The studies focus on comparing different teaching methodologies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has detected different approaches to help nursing students improve their reasoning and decision-making skills. The use of mobile apps, digital simulations, and learning games has a positive impact on the clinical reasoning abilities of nursing students and their motivation. Incorporating new technologies into problem-solving-based learning and decision-making can also enhance nursing students' reasoning skills. Nursing schools should evaluate their current methods and consider integrating or modifying new technologies and methodologies that can help enhance students' learning and improve their clinical reasoning and cognitive skills.

Transformation and Articulation of Clinical Data to Understand Students' and Health Professionals' Clinical Reasoning: Protocol for a Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

There are still unanswered questions regarding effective educational strategies to promote the transformation and articulation of clinical data while teaching and learning clinical reasoning. Additionally, understanding how this process can be analyzed and assessed is crucial, particularly considering the rapid growth of natural language processing in artificial intelligence.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to map educational strategies to promote the transformation and articulation of clinical data among students and health care professionals and to explore the methods used to assess these individuals' transformation and articulation of clinical data.

METHODS

This scoping review follows the Joanna Briggs Institute framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist for the analysis. A literature search was performed in November 2022 using 5 databases: CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science (Clarivate). The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework in November 2023. The scoping review will follow the 9-step framework proposed by Peters and colleagues of the Joanna Briggs Institute. A data extraction form has been developed using key themes from the research questions.

RESULTS

After removing duplicates, the initial search yielded 6656 results, and study selection is underway. The extracted data will be qualitatively analyzed and presented in a diagrammatic or tabular form alongside a narrative summary. The review will be completed by February 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

By synthesizing the evidence on semantic transformation and articulation of clinical data during clinical reasoning education, this review aims to contribute to the refinement of educational strategies and assessment methods used in academic and continuing education programs. The insights gained from this review will help educators develop more effective semantic approaches for teaching or learning clinical reasoning, as opposed to fragmented, purely symptom-based or probabilistic approaches. Besides, the results may suggest some ways to address challenges related to the assessment of clinical reasoning and ensure that the assessment tasks accurately reflect learners' developing competencies and educational progress.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/50797.

Defining conditions for effective interdisciplinary care team communication in an open surgical intensive care unit: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Poor interdisciplinary care team communication has been associated with increased mortality. The study aimed to define conditions for effective interdisciplinary care team communication.

DESIGN

An observational cross-sectional qualitative study.

SETTING

A surgical intensive care unit in a large, urban, academic referral medical centre.

PARTICIPANTS

A total 6 interviews and 10 focus groups from February to June 2021 (N=33) were performed. Interdisciplinary clinicians who cared for critically ill patients were interviewed. Participants included intensivist, transplant, colorectal, vascular, surgical oncology, trauma faculty surgeons (n=10); emergency medicine, surgery, gynaecology, radiology physicians-in-training (n=6), advanced practice providers (n=5), nurses (n=7), fellows (n=1) and subspecialist clinicians such as respiratory therapists, pharmacists and dieticians (n=4). Audiorecorded content of interviews and focus groups were deidentified and transcribed verbatim. The study team iteratively generated the codebook. All transcripts were independently coded by two team members.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Conditions for effective interdisciplinary care team communication.

RESULTS

We identified five themes relating to conditions for effective interdisciplinary care team communication in our surgical intensive care unit setting: role definition, formal processes, informal communication pathways, hierarchical influences and psychological safety. Participants reported that clear role definition and standardised formal communication processes empowered clinicians to engage in discussions that mitigated hierarchy and facilitated psychological safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardising communication and creating defined roles in formal processes can promote effective interdisciplinary care team communication by fostering psychological safety.

Rethinking neck-related arm pain: hypothetical clinical scenarios to differentiate the underlying IASP-defined pain mechanisms

Neck-related arm pain is frequently encountered in clinical settings, yet its underlying pain mechanisms remain elusive. While such pain radiating from the neck to the arm is often attributed to injuries or diseases of the nervous system (neuropathic pain), it can also arise from nociceptive (referred) or nociplastic sources. Regrettably, patients exhibiting this specific pain distribution are frequently diagnosed with varying terms, including 'cervicobrachialgia', 'cervicobrachial neuralgia', 'cervicobrachial pain syndrome', and 'cervical radiculopathy'. The ambiguity surrounding these diagnostic labels complicates the clinical reasoning process. It is imperative for clinicians to discern and comprehend the dominant pain mechanism. Three distinct hypothetical clinical scenarios depict patients with almost identical pain distribution but divergent dominant pain mechanisms. Within these scenarios, both subjective and objective examinations are employed to elucidate the dominant pain mechanism associated with neck-related arm pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, and nociplastic. Furthermore, clinicians must remain aware that the dominant pain mechanism can evolve over time.

COVID-19? Let me see your hands

During the first wave of the COVID�19 pandemic, a patient with anti-synthetase syndrome (ASS) was misdiagnosed as having bilateral severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia on admission. A comprehensive clinical evaluation would have led to the correct diagnosis earlier, as he had some data consistent with ASS on both physical examination and laboratory tests that were initially overlooked. In addition, a malignant lesion in the colon was found on screening for underlying malignancy. In this context, ASS has been considered a low-risk subgroup for cancer among idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. However, this should be interpreted cautiously and should not lead to neglect of adequate cancer screening adjusted for age, sex and other potential risk factors.

Pros and Cons of Using Artificial Intelligence Chatbots for Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Management

SYNOPSIS: Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically large language models (LLMs), which focus on the interaction between computers and human language, can influence musculoskeletal rehabilitation management. AI chatbots (eg, ChatGPT, Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard) are a form of large language models designed to understand, interpret, and generate text similar to what is produced by humans. Since their release, chatbots have triggered controversy in the international scientific community, including when they have passed university exams, generated credible scientific abstracts, and shown potential for replacing humans in scientific roles. The controversies extend to the field of musculoskeletal rehabilitation. In this Viewpoint, we describe the potential applications and limitations, and recommended actions for education, clinical practice, and research when using AI chatbots for musculoskeletal rehabilitation management, aspects that may have similar implications for the broader health care community. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(12):1-7. Epub 14 September 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.12000.

Comparative effectiveness study of flipped classroom versus online-only instruction of clinical reasoning for medical students

CONTEXT

Bedside clinical teaching is the backbone of clerkship education. Data-driven methods for supplementing bedside encounters with standardized content from vetted resources are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare a flipped-classroom versus an interactive online-only instruction for improving knowledge, skills, self-directed learning (SDL) behaviors, and satisfaction in a medical school clerkship.

METHODS

An IRB-approved prospective study employing a peer-reviewed clinical reasoning curriculum in neurology was conducted; 2nd-4th year medical students rotating through a required clerkship were enrolled. Students were randomized to flipped-classroom (i.e., flipped) or interactive asynchronous online instruction (i.e., online-only), which supplemented existing bedside teaching. Baseline and end-of-course knowledge, skill development, SDL behaviors, satisfaction, and long-term retention were assessed by peer-reviewed clinical reasoning exam, NBME scores, faculty/resident clinical evaluations, non-compulsory assignment completion, end-of-clerkship surveys, and objective structured clinical exam (OSCE).

RESULTS

104 students (49 flipped, 55 online-only) were enrolled. Age, gender, and training level did not differ by group (all p > 0.43); baseline knowledge was higher in the flipped group (p = 0.003). Knowledge-based exam scores did not differ by group even after adjusting for differences in baseline knowledge (2.3-points higher in flipped group, 95%CI -0.4-4.8, p = 0.07). Clinical skills were significantly higher in the flipped group, including examination skills (4.2 ± 0.5 vs. 3.9 ± 0.7, p = 0.03) and future housestaff potential (4.8 ± 0.3 vs 4.5 ± 0.6, p = 0.03). Students in the online-only group were more likely to engage in SDL (42 vs. 12%, p = 0.001) and reported more hours studying (6.1 vs. 3.8 hours, p = 0.03). Satisfaction (p = 0.51) and OSCE scores (p = 0.28) were not different by group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comparative study of two evidence-based curricular delivery approaches, we observed no difference in knowledge acquired. Greater clinical skills were observed with flipped instruction, while more SDL was observed with online-only instruction. Supplementing bedside teaching with blended instruction that balances live skill development with vetted online resources is optimal for clerkship education.