Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis

Time to diagnosis for a rare disease: managing medical uncertainty. A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

People with a rare disease commonly experience long delays from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis. Rare diseases are challenging to diagnose because they are clinically heterogeneous, and many present with non-specific symptoms common to many diseases. We aimed to explore the experiences of people with myositis, primary immunodeficiency (PID), and sarcoidosis from symptom onset to diagnosis to identify factors that might impact receipt of a timely diagnosis.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Our approach was informed by Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). We applied the lens of uncertainty management theory to tease out how patients experience, assess, manage and cope with puzzling and complex health-related issues while seeking a diagnosis in the cases of rare diseases.

RESULTS

We conducted interviews with 26 people with a rare disease. Ten participants had been diagnosed with a form of myositis, 8 with a primary immunodeficiency, and 8 with sarcoidosis. Time to diagnosis ranged from 6 months to 12 years (myositis), immediate to over 20 years (PID), and 6 months to 15 years (sarcoidosis). We identified four themes that described the experiences of participants with a rare disease as they sought a diagnosis for their condition: (1) normalising and/or misattributing symptoms; (2) particularising by clinicians; (3) asserting patients' self-knowledge; and (4) working together through the diagnosable moment.

CONCLUSIONS

Managing medical uncertainty in the time before diagnosis of a rare disease can be complicated by patients discounting their own symptoms and/or clinicians discounting the scale and impact of those symptoms. Persistence on the part of both clinician and patient is necessary to reach a diagnosis of a rare disease. Strategies such as recognising pattern failure and accommodating self-labelling are key to diagnosis.

Inductive foraging: patients taking the lead in diagnosis, a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Patient involvement in treatment decisions is widely accepted. Making a diagnosis, however, is still seen as a technical task mainly driven by physicians. Patients in this respect are perceived as passive providers of data. But, recent patient-centred concepts highlight the value of an active patient involvement in diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to reach a deeper understanding of how patients themselves contribute to the diagnostic process.

METHODS

This is an observational study of patient consultations with their General Practitioner (GP) in 12 German practices. We performed a mixed-method qualitative and quantitative analysis of 134 primary care consultations.

RESULTS

At the beginning of most consultations lies a phase where patients were invited to freely unfold their reason for encounter: This was named "inductive foraging" (IF). While patients actively present their complaints, GPs mainly listen and follow the presentation. This episode was found with every GP participating in this study. Ninety-one percent of consultations with diagnostic episodes were opened by IF. IF had a major contribution to the number of cues (diagnostic information) yielded in the diagnostic process. We illustrate a variety of tactics GPs make use of to invite, support, and terminate their patients in IF.

CONCLUSION

IF was found to be a highly relevant strategy in the diagnostic process. Patient involvement through IF offered a major contribution of diagnostic cues. We hypothesize that a patient-centred approach improves diagnosis.

The 6C model for accurately capturing the patient's medical history

Diagnostic errors are an internationally recognized patient safety concern, and leading causes are faulty data gathering and faulty information processing. Obtaining a full and accurate history from the patient is the foundation for timely and accurate diagnosis. A key concept underlying ideal history acquisition is "history clarification," meaning that the history is clarified to be depicted as clearly as a video, with the chronology being accurately reproduced. A novel approach is presented to improve history-taking, involving six dimensions: Courtesy, Control, Compassion, Curiosity, Clear mind, and Concentration, the '6 C's'. We report a case that illustrates how the 6C approach can improve diagnosis, especially in relation to artificial intelligence tools that assist with differential diagnosis.