Reflexivity and metapositions: strategies for appraisal of clinical evidence

Clinical practice enhanced by interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives

BACKGROUND

Experience-based knowing in general practice includes advanced interpretation of subjective, complex and particular phenomena in a social context. Enabling different metapositions for reflexivity may provide the accountability needed for such knowing to be recognized as evidence-based practice.

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate and discuss the potential of substantive theories to enhance interpretation of complex challenges in clinical knowing in general practice.

METHODS

We present a fictional case to demonstrate how interdisciplinary substantive theories, with a relevant and specific match to concrete questions, can situate the clinical interaction at an accountable platform. A female patient with Parkinson's disease consults her GP complaining that the disease is restraining her life and threatening her future. The GP has some new ideas from Bandura's theory of self-efficacy and introduces the patient to strategies for further action.

FINDINGS

The case presents an example of how a relevant substantive theory may offer the GP: 1) a sharper focus for achievement: recognising the issues of fear and identity in chronic, progressive illness, 2) a subsequent position for individualized understanding of adequate strategies: encouraging physical and social activity in a well-known context, and 3) an invitation to consider further possibilities: finding ways to alleviate the burden of fear and progressive decline; engaging in joyful living.

IMPLICATIONS

General practice knowledge embraces a diversity of sources with different evidence power. The transparency mediated to clinical practice when supported by relevant substantive theories may contribute to recognition of experience-based knowing as evidence-based practice.

Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? A systematic integrative review

When physicians and nurses are looking at the same patient, they may not see the same picture. If assuming that the clinical reasoning of both professions is alike and ignoring possible differences, aspects essential for care can be overlooked. Understanding the multifaceted concept of clinical reasoning of both professions may provide insight into the nature and purpose of their practices and benefit patient care, education and research. We aimed to identify, compare and contrast the documented features of clinical reasoning of physicians and nurses through the lens of layered analysis and to conduct a simultaneous concept analysis. The protocol of this systematic integrative review was published doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049862. A comprehensive search was performed in four databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Psychinfo, and Web of Science) from 30th March 2020 to 27th May 2020. A total of 69 Empirical and theoretical journal articles about clinical reasoning of practitioners were included: 27 nursing, 37 medical, and five combining both perspectives. Two reviewers screened the identified papers for eligibility and assessed the quality of the methodologically diverse articles. We used an onion model, based on three layers: Philosophy, Principles, and Techniques to extract and organize the data. Commonalities and differences were identified on professional paradigms, theories, intentions, content, antecedents, attributes, outcomes, and contextual factors. The detected philosophical differences were located on a care-cure and subjective-objective continuum. We observed four principle contrasts: a broad or narrow focus, consideration of the patient as such or of the patient and his relatives, hypotheses to explain or to understand, and argumentation based on causality or association. In the technical layer a difference in the professional concepts of diagnosis and the degree of patient involvement in the reasoning process were perceived. Clinical reasoning can be analysed by breaking it down into layers, and the onion model resulted in detailed features. Subsequently insight was obtained in the differences between nursing and medical reasoning. The origin of these differences is in the philosophical layer (professional paradigms, intentions). This review can be used as a first step toward gaining a better understanding and collaboration in patient care, education and research across the nursing and medical professions.

Developing and promoting qualitative methods in general practice research: Lessons learnt and strategies convened

Fifty years ago, qualitative research methods were unknown in medicine. Biomedicine and the positivist paradigm were universal academic standards. In the late 1980s, however, humanist perspectives emerged as substantial values in general practice. This progress fostered an effort among Nordic general practitioners to find research methods best suited to exploring clinical communication and the doctor-patient relationship. Simultaneously, qualitative methods were promoted internationally in medicine, mostly by social scientists. This article is a personal narrative of the history and impact of Nordic general practitioners customising qualitative methods for the study of clinical practice. I present lessons learnt and strategies convened in developing qualitative methods in this Nordic context. The patient-centred method paved the way for research standards consistent with our clinical ontology. We struggled to develop dialogues that promoted methodological legitimacy among medical colleagues. Methodological standards like rigour and reflexivity became important and contributed to intersubjectivity by sharing the research process. Gradually, our endeavours gained notice. In the last couple of decades, the number of published qualitative studies has increased, though perhaps at the cost of methodological quality. Indeed, there are also indications of a methodological backlash among influential journal editors. Nordic general practitioners have been prominent in developing qualitative methods suitable for cultivation of medical knowledge. Our position of knowing, close to the experiences of the individual patient and the everyday context, is different from that of a social scientist. It offers a unique point of departure for knowledge development that can make an important difference for both patients and doctors.

Diagnostic knowing in general practice: interpretative action and reflexivity

Background: Getting the right diagnosis is supposed to provide an explanation of a patient's health problem and inform health care decisions. As a core element of clinical reasoning, diagnosis deserves systematic and transparent analysis. Conceptual tools can make doctors become aware of and explore diagnostic knowing.Methods: We demonstrate diagnostic knowing analysed as interpretative and contextualised activity. Our analysis is based on Lonergan's theory of knowing, constituting the cognitive structures as experiencing, understanding, and judging, in a general practice case.Findings: Analysis makes the complexity of diagnostic knowing in this context more transparent, in this case concluding with four diagnostic labels: a corn, constipation, headache and atrial fibrillation. We demonstrate how a medically significant diagnosis does not necessarily evolve deductively from complaints. The opening lines from the patient give ideas of where to look for possible explanations - questions for understanding - rather than diagnostic hypotheses. Such questions emerge from the GP's experiences from meeting the patient, including imaginations and interpretations. When ideas and questions regarding diagnoses have been developed, they may be judged and subjected to reflection. Questioning may also emerge as transitory concerns, not extensively ruled out. Lonergan's theory demonstrated a strong fit with these aspects of diagnostic knowing in general practice.Implications: Analysis demonstrated systematic, transparent approaches to diagnostic knowing, relevant for clinical teaching. We argue that an interpretative understanding of diagnosis can change clinical practice, complementing hypothetico-deductive strategies by recognising additional substantial diagnostic modes and giving access to scholarly reflection.Key PointsDiagnosis is a core element of clinical reasoning, deserving systematic and transparent analysis beyond hypothetico-deductive reasoning or pattern recognitionDiagnostic knowing in general practice is a special instance of all human knowing with subjectivity, interpretation and reflexivity as essential elementsLonergan's theory for knowing based on experiencing, understanding, and judging allowed us to map, decode and recognise advanced acts of clinical reasoning We share our experiences of how these concepts gave us a tool for systematic analysis of the complexities taking place in the GP's office on an ordinary day.

How general practitioners understand and handle medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study

Background

Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are a common yet challenging encounter in primary care. The aim of this study was to explore how general practitioners (GPs) understand and handle MUS.

Methods

Three focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 23 GPs. Participants with varied clinical experience were purposively recruited. The data were analysed thematically, using the concept of framing as an analytical lens.

Results

The GPs alternated between a biomedical frame, centred on disease, and a biopsychosocial frame, centred on the sick person. Each frame shaped the GPs’ understanding and handling of MUS. The biomedical frame emphasised the lack of objective evidence, problematized subjective patient testimony, and manifested feelings of uncertainty, doubt and powerlessness. This in turn complicated patient handling. In contrast, the biopsychosocial frame emphasised clinical experience, turned patient testimony into a valuable source of information, and manifested feelings of confidence and competence. This in turn made them feel empowered. The GPs with the least experience relied more on the biomedical frame, whereas their more seasoned seniors relied mostly on the biopsychosocial frame.

Conclusion

The biopsychosocial frame helps GPs to understand and handle MUS better than the biomedical frame does. Medical students should spend more time learning biopsychosocial medicine, and to integrate the clinical knowledge of their peers with their own.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-018-0745-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview is useful and well accepted as part of the clinical assessment for depression and anxiety in primary care: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric complaints are common among primary care patients, with depression and anxiety being the most frequent. Diagnosis of anxiety and depression can be difficult, potentially leading to over- as well as under-diagnosis. The diagnostic process can be facilitated by incorporating structured interviews as part of the assessment. One such instrument, the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), has been established and accepted in psychiatric care. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of the paper-and-pen version of MINI version 6.0 among patients and staff in primary care centers in Sweden.

METHODS

The MINI was introduced at three primary care centers and was conducted by either therapists or general practitioners. Patients presented with symptoms that could suggest depression or anxiety disorders. The duration of the interview was recorded. The experiences and perceptions of 125 patients and their interviewers were collected using a structured questionnaire. Global satisfaction was measured with a visual-analog scale (0-100). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 patients and three therapists, and focus groups were held with 17 general practitioners. Qualitative content analysis was used for the interviews and focus groups. The findings across the groups were triangulated with results from the questionnaires.

RESULTS

The median global satisfaction with the MINI was 80 for patients and 86 for interviewers. General practitioners appreciated that the MINI identified comorbidities, as one-third of the patients had at least two psychiatric diagnoses. The MINI helped general practitioners attain a more accurate diagnosis. Patients appreciated that the MINI helped them recognize and verbalize their problems and did not find it intrusive. Patients and interviewers had mixed experiences with the yes-no format of the MINI, and the risk of subjective interpretations was acknowledged. Patients, general practitioners and therapists stated that the MINI contributed to appropriate treatment. The MINI assessment lasted 26 min on average (range 12 to 60 min).

CONCLUSIONS

The paper-and-pen version of the MINI could be useful in primary care as part of the clinical assessment of patients with problems suggestive of depression or anxiety disorders. The MINI was well accepted by patients, general practitioners and therapists.

Evidence-based medicine - an appropriate tool for evidence-based health policy? A case study from Norway

Background

Evidence-based policy (EBP), a concept modelled on the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), is widely used in different areas of policymaking. Systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses gradually became the methods of choice for synthesizing research evidence about interventions and judgements about quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Critics have argued that the relation between research evidence and service policies is weak, and that the notion of EBP rests on a misunderstanding of policy processes. Having explored EBM standards and knowledge requirements for health policy decision-making, we present an empirical point of departure for discussing the relationship between EBM and EBP.

Methods

In a case study exploring the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services (NOKC), an independent government unit, we first searched for information about the background and development of the NOKC to establish a research context. We then identified, selected and organized official NOKC publications as an empirical sample of typical top-of-the-line knowledge delivery adhering to EBM standards. Finally, we explored conclusions in this type of publication, specifically addressing their potential as policy decision tools.

Results

From a total sample of 151 SRs published by the NOKC in the period 2004–2013, a purposive subsample from 2012 (14 publications) advised major caution about their conclusions because of the quality or relevance of the underlying documentation. Although the case study did not include a systematic investigation of uptake and policy consequences, SRs were found to be inappropriate as universal tools for health policy decision-making.

Conclusions

The case study demonstrates that EBM is not necessarily suited to knowledge provision for every kind of policy decision-making. Our analysis raises the question of whether the evidence-based movement, represented here by an independent government organization, undertakes too broad a range of commissions using strategies that seem too confined. Policymaking in healthcare should be based on relevant and transparent knowledge, taking due account of the context of the intervention. However, we do not share the belief that the complex and messy nature of policy processes in general is compatible with the standards of EBM.

Knowledge 'Translation' as social learning: negotiating the uptake of research-based knowledge in practice

BACKGROUND

Knowledge translation and evidence-based practice have relied on research derived from clinical trials, which are considered to be methodologically rigorous. The result is practice recommendations based on a narrow view of evidence. We discuss how, within a practice environment, in fact individuals adopt and apply new evidence derived from multiple sources through ongoing, iterative learning cycles.

DISCUSSION

The discussion is presented in four sections. After elaborating on the multiple forms of evidence used in practice, in section 2 we argue that the practitioner derives contextualized knowledge through reflective practice. Then, in section 3, the focus shifts from the individual to the team with consideration of social learning and theories of practice. In section 4 we discuss the implications of integrative and negotiated knowledge exchange and generation within the practice environment. Namely, how can we promote the use of research within a team-based, contextualized knowledge environment? We suggest support for: 1) collaborative learning environments for active learning and reflection, 2) engaged scholarship approaches so that practice can inform research in a collaborative manner and 3) leveraging authoritative opinion leaders for their clinical expertise during the shared negotiation of knowledge and research. Our approach also points to implications for studying evidence-informed practice: the identification of practice change (as an outcome) ought to be supplemented with understandings of how and when social negotiation processes occur to achieve integrated knowledge. This article discusses practice knowledge as dependent on the practice context and on social learning processes, and suggests how research knowledge uptake might be supported from this vantage point.

Theory and interpretation in qualitative studies from general practice: Why and how?

Objective: In this article, I want to promote theoretical awareness and commitment among qualitative researchers in general practice and suggest adequate and feasible theoretical approaches. Approach: I discuss different theoretical aspects of qualitative research and present the basic foundations of the interpretative paradigm. Associations between paradigms, philosophies, methodologies and methods are examined and different strategies for theoretical commitment presented. Finally, I discuss the impact of theory for interpretation and the development of general practice knowledge. Main points: A scientific theory is a consistent and soundly based set of assumptions about a specific aspect of the world, predicting or explaining a phenomenon. Qualitative research is situated in an interpretative paradigm where notions about particular human experiences in context are recognized from different subject positions. Basic theoretical features from the philosophy of science explain why and how this is different from positivism. Reflexivity, including theoretical awareness and consistency, demonstrates interpretative assumptions, accounting for situated knowledge. Different types of theoretical commitment in qualitative analysis are presented, emphasizing substantive theories to sharpen the interpretative focus. Such approaches are clearly within reach for a general practice researcher contributing to clinical practice by doing more than summarizing what the participants talked about, without trying to become a philosopher. Conclusions: Qualitative studies from general practice deserve stronger theoretical awareness and commitment than what is currently established. Persistent attention to and respect for the distinctive domain of knowledge and practice where the research deliveries are targeted is necessary to choose adequate theoretical endeavours.

Barriers and facilitators perceived by physicians when using prediction models in practice

OBJECTIVES

Prediction models may facilitate risk-based management of health care conditions. In a large cluster-randomized trial, presenting calculated risks of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) to physicians (assistive approach) increased risk-based management of PONV. This increase did not improve patient outcome-that is, PONV incidence. This prompted us to explore how prediction tools guide the decision-making process of physicians.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Using mixed methods, we interviewed eight physicians to understand how predicted risks were perceived by the physicians and how they influenced decision making. Subsequently, all 57 physicians of the trial were surveyed for how the presented risks influenced their perceptions.

RESULTS

Although the prediction tool made physicians more aware of PONV prevention, the physicians reported three barriers to use predicted risks in their decision making. PONV was not considered an outcome of utmost importance; decision making on PONV prophylaxis was mostly intuitive rather than risk based; prediction models do not weigh benefits and risks of prophylactic drugs.

CONCLUSION

Combining probabilistic output of the model with their clinical experience may be difficult for physicians, especially when their decision-making process is mostly intuitive. Adding recommendations to predicted risks (directive approach) was considered an important step to facilitate the uptake of a prediction tool.

What is depression? Psychiatrists' and GPs' experiences of diagnosis and the diagnostic process

The diagnosis of depression is defined by psychiatrists, and guidelines for treatment of patients with depression are created in psychiatry. However, most patients with depression are treated exclusively in general practice. Psychiatrists point out that general practitioners' (GPs') treatment of depression is insufficient and a collaborative care (CC) model between general practice and psychiatry has been proposed to overcome this. However, for successful implementation, a CC model demands shared agreement about the concept of depression and the diagnostic process in the two sectors. We aimed to explore how depression is understood by GPs and clinical psychiatrists. We carried out qualitative in-depth interviews with 11 psychiatrists and 12 GPs. Analysis was made by Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. We found that the two groups of physicians differed considerably in their views on the usefulness of the concept of depression and in their language and narrative styles when telling stories about depressed patients. The differences were captured in three polarities which expressed the range of experiences in the two groups. Psychiatrists considered the diagnosis of depression as a pragmatic and agreed construct and they did not question its validity. GPs thought depression was a "gray area" and questioned the clinical utility in general practice. Nevertheless, GPs felt a demand from psychiatry to make their diagnosis based on instruments created in psychiatry, whereas psychiatrists based their diagnosis on clinical impression but used instruments to assess severity. GPs were wholly skeptical about instruments which they felt could be misleading. The different understandings could possibly lead to a clash of interests in any proposed CC model. The findings provide fertile ground for organizational research into the actual implementation of cooperation between sectors to explore how differences are dealt with.

Creating an interest in research and development as a means of reducing the gap between theory and practice in primary care: an interventional study based on strategic communication

Today, healthcare professionals are faced with the challenge of implementing research results in an optimal way. It is therefore important to create a climate that is conducive to research and development (R&D). For this reason, new strategies are required to enhance healthcare professionals’ interest in innovative thinking and R&D. Strategic communication with roots in sociology, psychology and political science was employed as a means of achieving long-term behavioural change. The aim of this study was to describe, follow up and evaluate a primary care intervention based on strategic communication intended to increase healthcare professionals’ interest in R&D over time. An interventional cohort study comprising all staff members (N = 1276) in a Swedish primary care area was initiated in 1997 and continued for 12 years. The intention to engage in R&D was measured on two occasions; at 7 and 12 years. Both descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were employed. The results demonstrated that the positive attitude to R&D increased over time, representing a first step towards new thinking and willingness to change work practices for the benefit of the patient. Strategic communication has not been previously employed as a scientific tool to create a long-term interest in R&D within primary care.

The significance of professional roles in collaboration on patients' transitions from hospital to home via an intermediate unit

The increasing complexity of the healthcare system and of patients' conditions, as well as resource limitations, calls for collaboration between professionals and institutions. The objective of this study was to explore the significance of professional roles in collaboration on patients' transitions from hospital to home via an intermediate care unit. We studied collaboration in the intermediate unit and between healthcare providers in the unit, a hospital and four municipalities in the hospital catchment area. Data were drawn from interviews with thirty-eight healthcare providers within specialist and primary health care and from observations in six multidisciplinary meetings, six report meetings and four discharge meetings in the unit. Transcripts of interviews and observations were analysed using a method of systematic text condensation. The results show that collaboration inside the intermediate unit and between the healthcare institutions was primarily 'a nursing matter'. Collaboration among the nurses was generally good. Except for the physician, all the healthcare providers experienced the collaboration in the unit as unidisciplinary rather than interprofessional. Although they wanted to collaborate interprofessionally, they were unable to do so in practice. The unit's physiotherapists and occupational therapists found themselves to be excluded from the nurses' community of practice, while the physician experienced the collaboration as excellent. The findings indicate that healthcare providers have different understandings of interprofessional collaboration and that in certain situations, they consider interprofessional collaboration to be an inappropriate working method. Interprofessional collaboration can promote a learning environment among healthcare providers. To achieve better interprofessional collaboration, it is probably necessary to create mutual understandings of interprofessionality and to reach an agreement on the situations in which it is an appropriate way to work.

Phenomenological Approaches in Psychology and Health Sciences

A whole family of qualitative methods is informed by phenomenological philosophy. When applying these methods, the material is analyzed using concepts from this philosophy to interrogate the findings and to enable greater theoretical analysis. However, the phenomenological approach represents different approaches, from pure description to those more informed by interpretation. Phenomenological philosophy developed from a discipline focusing on thorough descriptions, and only descriptions, toward a greater emphasis on interpretation being inherent in experience. An analogous development toward a broader acknowledgment of the need for interpretation, the influence of the relationship and the researcher, and the co-construction of the narrative is mirrored in qualitative analytic theory and the description of newer analytic methods as, for example, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis and Critical Narrative Analysis, methods which are theoretically founded in phenomenology. This methodological development and the inevitable contribution of interpretation are illustrated by a case from my own research about psychological interventions and the process of understanding in general practice.

"First, do no harm": balancing competing priorities in surgical practice

PURPOSE

To explore surgeons' perceptions of the factors that influence their intraoperative decision making, and implications for professional self-regulation and patient safety.

METHOD

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 39 academic surgeons from various specialties at four hospitals associated with the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine. Purposive and theoretical sampling was performed until saturation was achieved. Thematic analysis of the transcripts was conducted using a constructivist grounded-theory approach and was iteratively elaborated and refined as data collection progressed. A preexisting theoretical professionalism framework was particularly useful in describing the emergent themes; thus, the analysis was both inductive and deductive.

RESULTS

Several factors that surgeons described as influencing their decision making are widely accepted ("avowed," or in patients' best interests). Some are considered reasonable for managing multiple priorities external to the patient but are not discussed openly ("unavowed," e.g., teaching pressures). Others are actively denied and consider the surgeon's best interests rather than the patient's ("disavowed," e.g., reputation). Surgeons acknowledged tension in balancing avowed factors with unavowed and disavowed factors; when directly asked, they found it difficult to acknowledge that unavowed and disavowed factors could lead to patient harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Some factors that are not directly related to the patient enter into surgeons' intraoperative decision making. Although these are probably reasonable to consider within "real-world" practice, they are not sanctioned in current patient care constructs or taught to trainees. Acknowledging unavowed and disavowed factors as sources of pressure in practice may foster critical self-reflection and transparency when discussing surgical errors.

When elderly people give warning of suicide

BACKGROUND

The study has a dual objective: (1) to investigate the extent to which, and how and to whom, elderly people gave warning (according to the definition of the term given by the American Association of Suicidology) prior to suicide; (2) to investigate how these warnings were perceived by the recipients of them, and what reactions the recipients had to the warnings.

METHODS

This is a psychological autopsy study based on qualitative interviews. Sixty-three informants were interviewed about 23 suicides by individuals aged over 65 in Norway. The informants comprised relatives, general practitioners (GPs) and home-based care nurses. In general, the analysis of the interviews follows the systematic text condensation method.

RESULTS

The interviews contained four main themes regarding reactions to the warnings: "not taken seriously," "helplessness," "exhaustion," and "acceptance." A total of 14 of the 23 elderly people gave warning before the suicides occurred. The warnings were given to relatives (11), home-based care nurses (5), and GPs (2).

CONCLUSIONS

Even though more than half of the elderly people had given warning (most frequently to relatives) before the suicide, the warnings did not initiate preventive measures. Together with passive attitudes, the lack of recognition of both the risk of suicide and the opportunities for treatment prevented possible measures being implemented. The paper discusses the grounds for the reactions as well as how suicide warnings given by elderly people can be taken seriously.

Elderly people who committed suicide--their contact with the health service. What did they expect, and what did they get?

OBJECTIVE

Contact between elderly patients and healthcare professionals may be crucial for suicide prevention if suicidal tendencies are revealed and help is to be provided. The objective of the study was to investigate how elderly suicide cases had perceived the health service and what characterised their contact with it.

METHOD

This is a psychological autopsy study based on qualitative interviews with people who had known 1 of the total of 23 suicide cases aged over 65. The 63 informants were relatives, general practitioners (GPs) and home-based care workers. The systematic text condensation method was applied to analyse interviews.

RESULTS

Many of the elderly expressed distrust of health service once their functional decline began. They feared losing their autonomy if they became dependent on help, and many therefore refused health service provisions. Communication between them and helpers failed. As they gradually became more dependent on medical care, many experienced that they were not given the desired help, which confirmed their distrust.

CONCLUSION

Contact between these people and the health service must inspire confidence for it to prevent suicide. Elderly people at risk of suicide are vulnerable: they feel degraded if their autonomy is threatened by health personnel. The structure and organisation of the health service, and each worker's contact with the elderly, must preserve their dignity. Dignity must be evinced through the healthcare professionals' treatment of elderly people and a system that meets their needs.

Why suicide? Elderly people who committed suicide and their experience of life in the period before their death

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to acquire an understanding of the suicides among a group of elderly people by studying how they experienced their existence towards the end of life.

METHODS

This is a psychological autopsy study based on qualitative interviews with 63 informants in relation to 23 suicides committed by persons aged over 65 in Norway. Informants who knew the deceased persons well describe what the elderly person communicated to them about their experience of life in the period before the suicide and how they as informants saw and understood this. The informants comprise relatives, family doctors and home-based care nurses. The analysis of the interviews follows the systematic text condensation method.

RESULTS

The descriptions are divided into three main elements: the elderly persons' experiences of life, their perception of themselves, and their conceptions of death. "Experience of life" has two sub-topics: this life has been lived and life as a burden. Everything that had given value to their life had been lost and life was increasingly experienced as a burden. Their "perception of themselves" concerned losing oneself. Functional decline meant that they no longer had freedom of action and self-determination. "Conceptions of death" involve the following sub-topics: acknowledgement/acceptance and death is better than life. Life had entered into its final phase, and they seemed to accept death. For some time, many of them had expressed the wish to die.

CONCLUSIONS

The results lead us to argue that their suicides should be considered as existential choices. The sum total of the different forms of strain had made life a burden they could no longer bear. Age meant that they were in a phase of life that entailed closeness to death, which they could also see as a relief.

"Why do they become vulnerable when faced with the challenges of old age?" Elderly people who committed suicide, described by those who knew them

BACKGROUND

Suicidal behavior among the elderly is a research field in which qualitative and quantitative methods can and should supplement each other. The objective of this qualitative study is to investigate whether the descriptions of elderly people who committed suicide, given by those who knew them, can provide common features that create recognizable patterns, and if so whether these patterns can help to shed light on the suicidal process.

METHOD

This is a psychological autopsy study based on qualitative interviews with 63 informants concerning 23 suicides committed by persons aged over 65 in Norway. The informants were relatives, their family doctors, and home-based care nurses. In general, the analysis of the interviews follows the systematic text condensation method.

RESULTS

The descriptions have three main topics: life histories, personality traits and relationships. "Life histories" includes the sub-topics ability to survive and action-oriented achievers. They describe people who came through difficult circumstances when growing up and who were action-oriented in life in general and in crises. "Personality traits" includes the sub-topics obstinacy and controlling others. The informants saw the elderly people as strong-willed, obstinate and possessing a considerable ability to control themselves and those around them. "Relationships" includes the sub-topics I didn't know him and He showed no ability to meet us halfway, and describes the informants' experience of emotionally closed persons who kept a distance in their relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the descriptions of the elderly people given in this study, we argue that these individuals will find difficulty in accepting and adapting to age-related loss of function since their self-esteem is so strongly associated with being productive and in control. Loss of control reveals their vulnerability - and this they cannot tolerate.

How student models of expertise and innovation impact the development of adaptive expertise in medicine

OBJECTIVES

The ability to innovate new solutions in response to daily workplace challenges is an important component of adaptive expertise. Exploring how to optimally develop this skill is therefore of paramount importance to education researchers. This is certainly no less true in health care, where optimal patient care is contingent on the continuous efforts of doctors and other health care workers to provide the best care to their patients through the development and incorporation of new knowledge. Medical education programmes must therefore foster the skills and attitudes necessary to engage future doctors in the systematic development of innovative problem solving. The aim of this paper is to describe the perceptions and experiences of medical students in their third and fourth years of training, and to explore their understanding of their development as adaptive experts.

METHODS

A sample of 25 medical students participated in individual 45-60-minute semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and entered into NVivo qualitative data analysis software to facilitate a thematic analysis. The analysis was both inductive, in that themes were generated from the data, and deductive, in that our data were meaningful when interpreted in the context of theories of adaptive expertise.

RESULTS

Participants expressed a general belief that, as learners in the health care system, exerting any effort to be innovative was beyond the scope of their responsibilities. Generally, students suggested that innovative practice was the prerogative of experts and an outcome of expert development centred on the acquisition of knowledge and experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Students' perceptions of themselves as having no responsibility to be innovative in their learning process have implications for their learning trajectories as adaptive experts.

Clinical intuition versus statistics: different modes of tacit knowledge in clinical epidemiology and evidence-based medicine

Despite its phenomenal success since its inception in the early nineteen-nineties, the evidence-based medicine movement has not succeeded in shaking off an epistemological critique derived from the experiential or tacit dimensions of clinical reasoning about particular individuals. This critique claims that the evidence-based medicine model does not take account of tacit knowing as developed by the philosopher Michael Polanyi. However, the epistemology of evidence-based medicine is premised on the elimination of the tacit dimension from clinical judgment. This is demonstrated through analyzing the dichotomy between clinical and statistical intuition in evidence-based medicine's epistemology of clinical reasoning. I argue that clinical epidemiology presents a more nuanced epistemological model for the application of statistical epidemiology to the clinical context. Polanyi's theory of tacit knowing is compatible with the model of clinical reasoning associated with clinical epidemiology, but not evidence-based medicine.

Influence of perceived difficulty of cases on physicians' diagnostic reasoning

PURPOSE

While diagnosing problems, physicians frequently switch from nonanalytical to reflective reasoning. The conditions inducing doctors to reflect are largely unknown. The authors investigated whether a shift to reflection occurs when physicians perceive a case as problematic, and its effects on diagnostic accuracy.

METHOD

The authors conducted two within-subjects experiments in Brazilian teaching hospitals in 2007. In Experiment 1, 20 medical residents diagnosed the same 10 clinical cases under two experimental conditions: a nonproblematic versus a problematic context. (The latter was created by informing participants that other physicians failed to diagnose the case previously.) In addition, participants judged whether a set of medical concepts were related to the case, and response time was measured. In Experiment 2, 18 residents diagnosed two cases while thinking aloud. The authors hypothesized that a case perceived as problematic would trigger reflection, leading to higher diagnostic accuracy, lower response times for recognizing concepts (Experiment 1), more time for diagnosing, and more elaborate think-aloud protocols (Experiment 2).

RESULTS

Experiment 1: Accuracy of diagnosis was significantly higher within the problematic context, and participants were faster in deciding whether concepts were related to the case. The same cases were evaluated as more complex and less frequently seen. Experiment 2: Time spent on diagnosis, memory for case findings, and inferences derived from the cases were significantly higher within the problematic context.

CONCLUSIONS

A context perceived as problematic induced reflection in the participating clinicians, as indicated by lower response times, more time spent on diagnosis, and more elaborate protocols. Reflective reasoning comprised more careful analysis of findings and alternative diagnoses, and increased diagnostic accuracy.

Redescribing reflective practice and evidence-based practice discourses

This paper provides an analysis on the discourses of reflective practice and evidence-based practice. It commences by examining the role of discourse in describing and defining our beliefs and attitudes. Consequently, it argues that each discourse is based on a certain epistemology, which in effect are language constructs that create realities and like all language constructs, the epistemology of each discourse is open to the possibility of being restructured. Sequentially, any discourse can (re)describe a different type of reality by providing a set of different words, values and beliefs. Eventually, by exposing the language play and the engineered binary of the reflective practice and the evidence-based practice discourses it is concluded that these discourses are not mutually exclusive as they have been portrayed by most of the literature, but complementary ones. Finally, reflective practice and evidence-based practice are re-described as supplementary discourses and practitioners can simultaneously utilize both through the process of critical reflexivity.

Effects of reflective practice on the accuracy of medical diagnoses

CONTEXT

Reflective practice has been suggested to be an important instrument in improving clinical judgement and developing medical expertise. Empirical evidence supporting this suggestion, however, is absent. This paper reports on an experiment conducted to study the effects of reflective practice on diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

Participants were 42 internal medicine residents in hospitals in 2 states in the northeast of Brazil. They diagnosed 16 clinical cases. The experiment employed a repeated measures design, with 2 independent variables: the complexity of clinical cases (simple or complex), and the reasoning approach induced to diagnose the case (participants were instructed to diagnose each case either through pattern recognition or reflective reasoning). The dependent variable was the accuracy of the diagnosis provided for each case. All participants participated in each of the 2 levels of both independent variables.

RESULTS

A main effect of case complexity emerged. There was no statistically significant main effect of reflective practice. However, a significant interaction effect was found between case complexity and mode of processing (F[1,41] = 4.48, P < 0.05), indicating that although reflective practice did not make a difference to accuracy of diagnosis in simple cases, it had a positive effect when diagnosing complex cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Reflective practice had a positive effect on diagnosis of complex, unusual cases. Non-analytical reasoning was shown to be as effective as reflective reasoning for diagnosing routine clinical cases. Findings support the idea that reflective practice may particularly improve diagnoses in situations of uncertainty and uniqueness, reducing diagnostic errors.

The ibogaine medical subculture

AIM OF THE STUDY

Ibogaine is a naturally occurring psychoactive indole alkaloid that is used to treat substance-related disorders in a global medical subculture, and is of interest as an ethnopharmacological prototype for experimental investigation and possible rational pharmaceutical development. The subculture is also significant for risks due to the lack of clinical and pharmaceutical standards. This study describes the ibogaine medical subculture and presents quantitative data regarding treatment and the purpose for which individuals have taken ibogaine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All identified ibogaine "scenes" (defined as a provider in an associated setting) apart from the Bwiti religion in Africa were studied with intensive interviewing, review of the grey literature including the Internet, and the systematic collection of quantitative data.

RESULTS

Analysis of ethnographic data yielded a typology of ibogaine scenes, "medical model", "lay provider/treatment guide", "activist/self-help", and "religious/spiritual". An estimated 3414 individuals had taken ibogaine as of February 2006, a fourfold increase relative to 5 years earlier, with 68% of the total having taken it for the treatment of a substance-related disorder, and 53% specifically for opioid withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid withdrawal is the most common reason for which individuals took ibogaine. The focus on opioid withdrawal in the ibogaine subculture distinguishes ibogaine from other agents commonly termed "psychedelics", and is consistent with experimental research and case series evidence indicating a significant pharmacologically mediated effect of ibogaine in opioid withdrawal.

A review of evidence-based practice, nursing research and reflection: levelling the hierarchy

AIM

This paper examines the evidence-based practice movement, the hierarchy of evidence and the relationship between evidence-based practice and reflective practice.

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice is equated with effective decision making, with avoidance of habitual practice and with enhanced clinical performance. The hierarchy of evidence has promoted randomized control trials as the most valid source of evidence. However, this is problematic for practitioners as randomized control trials overlook certain types of knowledge that, through the process of reflection, provide useful information for individualized and effective practice.

METHOD

A literature search was undertaken using CINAHL, medline and Ovid electronic databases in early 2006. The search terms used were: evidence-based practice, research evidence, evidence for practice, qualitative research, reflective practice, reflection and evidence. Other sources included handpicking of books on evidence-based practice, reflection and research. Only material written in English was included.

FINDINGS

The hierarchy of evidence that has promoted randomized control trials as the most valid form of evidence may actually impede the use of most effective treatment because of practical, political/ideological and epistemological contradictions and limitations. Furthermore, evidence-based practice appears to share very similar definitions, aims and procedures with reflective practice. Hence, it appears that the evidence-based practice movement may benefit much more from the use of reflection on practice, rather than the use of the hierarchical structure of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Evidence-based practice is necessary for nursing, but its' effective implementation may be hindered by the hierarchy of evidence. Furthermore, evidence-based practice and reflection are both processes that share very similar aims and procedures. Therefore, to enable the implementation of best evidence in practice, the hierarchy of evidence might need to be abandoned and reflection to become a core component of the evidence-based practice movement.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Provides an elaborated analysis for clinical nurses on the definition and implementation of evidence in practice.

Diagnostic errors and reflective practice in medicine

BACKGROUND

Adverse effects of medical errors have received increasing attention. Diagnostic errors account for a substantial fraction of all medical errors, and strategies for their prevention have been explored. A crucial requirement for that is better understanding of origins of medical errors. Research on medical expertise may contribute to that as far as it explains reasoning processes involved in clinical judgements. The literature has indicated the capability of critically reflecting upon one's own practice as a key requirement for developing and maintaining medical expertise throughout life.

OBJECTIVES

This article explores potential relationships between reflective practice and diagnostic errors.

METHODS

A survey of the medical expertise literature was conducted. Origins of medical errors frequently reported in the literature were explored. The potential relationship between diagnostic errors and the several dimensions of reflective practice in medicine, brought to light by recent research, were theoretically explored.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Uncertainty and fallibility inherent to clinical judgements are discussed. Stages in the diagnostic reasoning process where errors could occur and their potential sources are highlighted, including the role of medical heuristics and biases. The authors discuss the nature of reflective practice in medicine, and explore whether and how the several behaviours and reasoning processes that constitute reflective practice could minimize diagnostic errors. Future directions for further research are discussed. They involve empirical research on the role of reflective practice in improving clinical reasoning and the development of educational strategies to enhancing reflective practice.

The usefulness and feasibility of a reflexivity method to improve clinical handover

OBJECTIVE

The evaluation of the usefulness and feasibility of the reflexivity method (RM), which encourages dialogue and reflections between doctors, and enables change.

METHODS

On the basis of literature research into effective medical professional learning and reflection, essential elements that stimulate reflection and learning were distinguished and converted into the basic elements of a method developed for this purpose, the RM. The method is used as a tool to stimulate reflection processes, which, in turn, will enable change. It was used 20 times in a large university medical centre in the Netherlands. Clinical handovers were the subject of reflection. The evaluation of the usefulness and feasibility of the RM is based on analysing the improvements realized by using the method, and a questionnaire to measure the experiences of the users of the method.

RESULTS

Each of the 17 departments evaluated received 10 recommendations on average. Fifty-eight per cent of these were realized after 6-9 months, and 18% were in the working-out phase. Improvements in the structure, rules and protocols concerning handovers were realized as well as in the atmosphere. The users of the method evaluated the method overall positively: they appreciated the created context for reflection, that is, having a dialogue with a colleague working at the same hierarchical level, the non-normative character of the method and the 'doctor-ownership' of the method. They also reported an effect on their handling and thinking regarding handovers.

CONCLUSIONS

The RM seems to be a useful and feasible method to stimulate the doctors' reflection processes, resulting in implemented improvements.

Complexity and reflexivity: two important issues for economic evaluation in health care

Economic evaluations are analytic techniques to assess the relative costs and consequences of health care programmes and technologies. Their role is to provide rigorous data to inform the health care decision-making process. Economic evaluation may oversimplify complex health care decisions. These analyses often ignore important health consequences, contextual elements, relationships or other relevant modifying factors, which might not be appropriate in a multi-objective, multi-stakeholder issue. One solution would be to develop a new paradigm based on the issues of perspective and context. Complexity theory may provide a useful conceptual framework for economic evaluation in health care. Complexity thinking develops an awareness of issues including uncertainty, contextual issues, multiple perspectives, broader societal involvement, and transdisciplinarity. This points the economic evaluation field towards an accountability and epistemology based on pluralism and uncertainty, requiring new forms of lay-expert engagement and roles of lay knowledge into decision-making processes. This highlights the issue of reflexivity in economic evaluation in health care. A reflexive approach would allow economic evaluators to analyze how objective structures and subjective elements influence their practices. In return, this would point increase the integrity and reliability of economic evaluations. Reflexivity provides opportunities for critically thinking about the organization and activities of the intellectual field, and perhaps the potential of moving in new, creative directions. This paper argues for economic evaluators to have a less positivist attitude towards what is useful knowledge, and to use more imagination about the data and methodologies they use.

The doctor, his patient, and the computerized evidence-based guideline

This paper explores some of the issues raised by the finding in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that general practitioners (GPs) taking part failed to use a computerized evidence-based guideline, nor did it have any impact on patient outcomes. GPs are expected to 'make an initial decision on every problem [patients] may present' and to address psychological and social problems in addition to biomedical ones. The computerized guideline imposed an external, largely biomedical, agenda that superseded the patient's. This disrupted the normal pattern of GP consultations and it was therefore ignored. Guidelines for any particular disease are effective if backed up by a detailed programme of education and audit. However, the large number of different conditions seen in general practice means that it is impractical to have such programmes for more than a small fraction of the clinical workload. The reductionist assumptions underlying the construction of evidence-based guidelines from systematic reviews lead to inflexible recommendations on the management of disease. Anthropologists and sociologists make an important distinction between scientifically defined diseases and the culturally constructed experience of illness. Because GPs deal with patients suffering illness that may or may not result from disease, disease-centred guidelines often conflict with their needs and wishes. The development of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was intended as a tool to help doctors make sense of evidence in the context of individual patients' problems. Few GPs are skilled in it, and it has been appropriated by powerful expert groups such as guidelines developers and the pharmaceutical industry. It is suggested that more understanding of EBM by GPs leads to better informed decision making by them and their patients.

Framing the doctor-patient relationship in chronic illness: a comparative study of general practitioners' accounts

How family doctors conceptualise chronic illness in the consultation has important implications for both the delivery of medical care, and its experience by patients. In this paper, we present the results of a re-analysis of qualitative data collected in a series of studies of British family doctors between 1995 and 2001, to explore the ways in which the legitimacy and authority of medical knowledge and practice are organised and worked out in relation to three kinds of chronic illness (menorrhagia; depression; and chronic low back pain/medically unexplained symptoms). We present a comparative analysis of (a). the moral evaluation of the patient (and judgements about the legitimacy of symptom presentation); (b). the possibilities of disposal; and (c). doctors' empathic responses to the patient, in each of these clinical cases. Our analysis defines some of the fundamental conditions through which general practitioners frame their relationships with patients presenting complex but sometimes diffuse combinations of 'social', 'psychological' and 'medical' symptoms. These are fundamental to, yet barely touched by, the increasingly voluminous literature on how doctors should interact with patients. Moving beyond the individual studies from which our data are drawn, we have outlined some of the highly complex and demanding features of what is often seen as routine and unrewarding medical work, and some of the key requirements for the local negotiation of patients' problems and their meanings (for both patients and doctors) in everyday general practice.