Implementation of diagnostic pauses in the ambulatory setting

Scaling up a diagnostic pause at the ICU-to-ward transition: an exploration of barriers and facilitators to implementation of the ICU-PAUSE handoff tool

OBJECTIVES

The transition from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the medical ward is a high-risk period due to medical complexity, reduced patient monitoring, and diagnostic uncertainty. Standardized handoff practices reduce errors associated with transitions of care, but little work has been done to standardize the ICU to ward handoff. Further, tools that exist do not focus on preventing diagnostic error. Using Human-Centered Design methods we previously created a novel EHR-based ICU-ward handoff tool (ICU-PAUSE) that embeds a diagnostic pause at the time of transfer. This study aims to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing a diagnostic pause at the ICU-to-ward transition.

METHODS

This is a multi-center qualitative study of semi-structured interviews with intensivists from ten academic medical centers. Interviews were analyzed iteratively through a grounded theory approach. The Sittig-Singh sociotechnical model was used as a unifying conceptual framework.

RESULTS

Across the eight domains of the model, we identified major benefits and barriers to implementation. The embedded pause to address diagnostic uncertainty was recognized as a key benefit. Participants agreed that standardization of verbal and written handoff would decrease variation in communication. The main barriers fell within the domains of workflow, institutional culture, people, and assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents a novel application of the Sittig-Singh model in the assessment of a handoff tool. A unique feature of ICU-PAUSE is the explicit acknowledgement of diagnostic uncertainty, a practice that has been shown to reduce medical error and prevent premature closure. Results will be used to inform future multi-site implementation efforts.

Developing, pilot testing, and refining requirements for 3 EHR-integrated interventions to improve diagnostic safety in acute care: a user-centered approach

Objective

To describe a user-centered approach to develop, pilot test, and refine requirements for 3 electronic health record (EHR)-integrated interventions that target key diagnostic process failures in hospitalized patients.

Materials and Methods

Three interventions were prioritized for development: a Diagnostic Safety Column (DSC) within an EHR-integrated dashboard to identify at-risk patients; a Diagnostic Time-Out (DTO) for clinicians to reassess the working diagnosis; and a Patient Diagnosis Questionnaire (PDQ) to gather patient concerns about the diagnostic process. Initial requirements were refined from analysis of test cases with elevated risk predicted by DSC logic compared to risk perceived by a clinician working group; DTO testing sessions with clinicians; PDQ responses from patients; and focus groups with clinicians and patient advisors using storyboarding to model the integrated interventions. Mixed methods analysis of participant responses was used to identify final requirements and potential implementation barriers.

Results

Final requirements from analysis of 10 test cases predicted by the DSC, 18 clinician DTO participants, and 39 PDQ responses included the following: DSC configurable parameters (variables, weights) to adjust baseline risk estimates in real-time based on new clinical data collected during hospitalization; more concise DTO wording and flexibility for clinicians to conduct the DTO with or without the patient present; and integration of PDQ responses into the DSC to ensure closed-looped communication with clinicians. Analysis of focus groups confirmed that tight integration of the interventions with the EHR would be necessary to prompt clinicians to reconsider the working diagnosis in cases with elevated diagnostic error (DE) risk or uncertainty. Potential implementation barriers included alert fatigue and distrust of the risk algorithm (DSC); time constraints, redundancies, and concerns about disclosing uncertainty to patients (DTO); and patient disagreement with the care team's diagnosis (PDQ).

Discussion

A user-centered approach led to evolution of requirements for 3 interventions targeting key diagnostic process failures in hospitalized patients at risk for DE.

Conclusions

We identify challenges and offer lessons from our user-centered design process.

The future of teaching management reasoning: important questions and potential solutions

Management reasoning is distinct from but inextricably linked to diagnostic reasoning in the iterative process that is clinical reasoning. Complex and situated, management reasoning skills are distinct from diagnostic reasoning skills and must be developed in order to promote cogent clinical decisions. While there is growing interest in teaching management reasoning, key educational questions remain regarding when it should be taught, how it can best be taught in the clinical setting, and how it can be taught in a way that helps mitigate implicit bias. Here, we describe several useful tools to structure teaching of management reasoning across learner levels and educational settings. The management script provides a scaffold for organizing knowledge around management and can serve as a springboard for discussion of uncertainty, thresholds, high-value care, and shared decision-making. The management pause reserves space for management discussions and exploration of a learner's reasoning. Finally, the equity reflection invites learners to examine management decisions from a health equity perspective, promoting the practice of metacognition around implicit bias. These tools are easily deployable, and - when used regularly - foster a learning environment primed for the successful teaching of management reasoning.

Alcoholism and American healthcare: The case for a patient safety approach

Alcoholism, more professionally termed alcohol use disorder (AUD), is a widespread and costly behavioral health condition. The aims of this paper are draw attention to systemic gaps in care for patients with AUD and advocate for patient safety leaders to partner with both the mainstream medical and substance abuse treatment communities to reduce harm in this patient population. The authors performed a narrative review of the literature on the current state of AUD treatment and patient safety, finding extensive evidence that patients with AUD usually go undiagnosed, unreferred and untreated. When they do receive AUD treatment, little evidence was found to indicate that a patient safety approach is incorporated into their care. Behavioral medicine is virgin territory for the patient safety movement. Medical care and behavioral medicine in the United States currently constitute two separate and unequal systems generally lacking in pathways of communication or care coordination for AUD patients. Significant barriers include institutional culture, individual and systemic bias against those with AUD, and health care infrastructure, especially the separation of medical and behavioral treatment. It is the authors’ conclusion that care of patients with AUD is unsafe. We advocate for the patient safety approach common in American hospitals to be extended to AUD treatment. Experienced patient safety leaders are in the strongest position to initiate collaboration between the mainstream medical and substance abuse treatment communities to reduce harm for this patient population.

Checklists to reduce diagnostic error: a systematic review of the literature using a human factors framework

OBJECTIVES

To apply a human factors framework to understand whether checklists reduce clinical diagnostic error have (1) gaps in composition; and (2) components that may be more likely to reduce errors.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through 15 February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Any article that included a clinical checklist aimed at improving the diagnostic process. Checklists were defined as any structured guide intended to elicit additional thinking regarding diagnosis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently reviewed and selected articles based on eligibility criteria. Each extracted unique checklist was independently characterised according to the well-established human factors framework: Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 (SEIPS 2.0). If reported, checklist efficacy in reducing diagnostic error (eg, diagnostic accuracy, number of errors or any patient-related outcomes) was outlined. Risk of study bias was independently evaluated using standardised quality assessment tools in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 30 articles containing 25 unique checklists were included. Checklists were characterised within the SEIPS 2.0 framework as follows: Work Systems subcomponents of Tasks (n=13), Persons (n=2) and Internal Environment (n=3); Processes subcomponents of Cognitive (n=20) and Social and Behavioural (n=2); and Outcomes subcomponents of Professional (n=2). Other subcomponents, such as External Environment or Patient outcomes, were not addressed. Fourteen checklists examined effect on diagnostic outcomes: seven demonstrated improvement, six were without improvement and one demonstrated mixed results. Importantly, Tasks-oriented studies more often demonstrated error reduction (n=5/7) than those addressing the Cognitive process (n=4/10).

CONCLUSIONS

Most diagnostic checklists incorporated few human factors components. Checklists addressing the SEIPS 2.0 Tasks subcomponent were more often associated with a reduction in diagnostic errors. Studies examining less explored subcomponents and emphasis on Tasks, rather than the Cognitive subcomponents, may be warranted to prevent diagnostic errors.

Dual Process Theory and Cognitive Load: How Intensivists Make Diagnoses

Improving clinical reasoning in order to reduce frequency of diagnostic errors is an important area of study. The authors discuss dual process theory as a model of clinical reasoning and explore the role that cognitive load plays in clinical reasoning in the intensive care unit environment.

Promoting Critical Thinking in Your Intensive Care Unit Team

Effective and efficient critical thinking skills are necessary to engage in accurate clinical reasoning and to make appropriate clinical decisions. Teaching and promoting critical thinking skills in the intensive care unit is challenging because of the volume of data and the constant distractions of competing obligations. Understanding and acknowledging cognitive biases and their impact on clinical reasoning are necessary to promote and support critical thinking in the ICU. Active educational strategies such as concept or mechanism mapping can help to diagnose disorganized thinking and reinforce key connections and important clinical and pathophysiologic concepts, which are critical for inductive reasoning.

Quality Improvement Interventions and Implementation Strategies for Urine Culture Stewardship in the Acute Care Setting: Advances and Challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this article is to highlight how and why urinalyses and urine cultures are misused, review quality improvement interventions to optimize urine culture utilization, and highlight how to implement successful, sustainable interventions to improve urine culture practices in the acute care setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing inappropriate treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria often focus on optimizing urine test utilization (i.e., urine culture stewardship). Urine culture stewardship interventions in acute care hospitals span the spectrum of quality improvement initiatives, ranging from strong systems-based interventions like suppression of urine culture results to weaker interventions that focus on clinician education alone. While most urine culture stewardship interventions have met with some success, overall results are mixed, and implementation strategies to improve sustainability are not well understood.

SUMMARY

Successful diagnostic stewardship interventions are based on an assessment of underlying key drivers and focus on multifaceted and complementary approaches. Individual intervention components have varying impacts on effectiveness, provider autonomy, and sustainability. The best urine culture stewardship strategies ultimately include both technical and socio-adaptive components with long-term, iterative feedback required for sustainability.

A diagnostic time-out to improve differential diagnosis in pediatric abdominal pain

BACKGROUND

Pediatric abdominal pain is challenging to diagnose and often results in unscheduled return visits to the emergency department. External pressures and diagnostic momentum can impair physicians from thoughtful reflection on the differential diagnosis (DDx). We implemented a diagnostic time-out intervention and created a scoring tool to improve the quality and documentation rates of DDx. The specific aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase the frequency of resident and attending physician documentation of DDx in pediatric patients admitted with abdominal pain by 25% over 6 months.

METHODS

We reviewed a total of 165 patients admitted to the general pediatrics service at one institution. Sixty-four history and physical (H&P) notes were reviewed during the baseline period, July-December 2017; 101 charts were reviewed post-intervention, January-June 2018. Medical teams were tasked to perform a diagnostic time-out on all patients during the study period. Metrics tracked monthly included percentage of H&Ps with a 'complete' DDx and quality scores (Qs) using our Differential Diagnosis Scoring Rubric.

RESULTS

At baseline, 43 (67%) resident notes and 49 (77%) attending notes documented a 'complete' DDx. Post-intervention, 59 (58%) resident notes and 69 (68%) attending notes met this criteria. Mean Qs, pre- to post-intervention, for resident-documented differential diagnoses increased slightly (2.41-2.47, p = 0.73), but attending-documented DDx did not improve (2.85-2.82, p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated a marginal improvement in the quality of resident-documented DDx. Expansion of diagnoses considered within a DDx may contribute to higher diagnostic accuracy.

The variability in how physicians think: a casebased diagnostic simulation exercise

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about how physician diagnostic thinking unfolds over time when evaluating patients. We designed a case-based simulation to understand how physicians reason, create differential diagnoses, and employ strategies to achieve a correct diagnosis.

METHODS

Between June 2017 and August 2018, hospital medicine physicians at two academic medical centers were presented a standardized case of a patient presenting with chest pain who was ultimately diagnosed with herpes zoster using an interview format. Case information was presented in predetermined aliquots where participants were then asked to think-aloud, describing their thoughts and differential diagnoses given the data available. At the conclusion of the interview, participants were asked questions about their diagnostic process. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and content analysis was conducted to identify key themes related to the diagnostic thinking process.

RESULTS

Sixteen hospital medicine physicians (nine men, seven women) participated in interviews and four obtained the correct final diagnosis (one man, three women). Participants had an average of nine years of experience. Overall, substantial heterogeneity in both the differential diagnoses and clinical reasoning among participants was observed. Those achieving the correct diagnosis utilized systems-based or anatomic approaches when forming their initial differential diagnoses, rather than focusing on life-threatening diagnoses alone. Evidence of cognitive bias was common; those with the correct diagnosis more often applied debiasing strategies than those with the incorrect final diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity in diagnostic evaluation appears to be common and may indicate faulty data processing. Structured approaches and debiasing strategies appear helpful in promoting diagnostic accuracy.

Diagnostic Challenges in Outpatient Stroke: Stroke Chameleons and Atypical Stroke Syndromes

Failure to diagnose transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke in a timely fashion is associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. In the outpatient or clinic setting, we suspect that patients with minor, transient, and atypical manifestations of cerebrovascular disease are most prone to missed or delayed diagnosis. We therefore detail common stroke chameleon symptoms as well as atypical stroke presentations, broadly review new developments in the study of diagnostic error in the outpatient setting, suggest practical clinical strategies for diagnostic error reduction, and emphasize the need for rapid consultation of stroke specialists when appropriate. We also address the role of psychiatric disease and vascular risk factors in the diagnostic evaluation and treatment of suspected stroke/TIA patients. We advocate incorporating diagnostic time-outs into clinical practice to assure that the diagnosis of TIA or stroke is considered in all relevant patient encounters after a detailed history and examination are conducted in the outpatient setting.

Prevalence and characterisation of diagnostic error among 7-day all-cause hospital medicine readmissions: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The prevalence and aetiology of diagnostic error among hospitalised adults is unknown, though likely contributes to patient morbidity and mortality. We aim to identify and characterise the prevalence and types of diagnostic error among patients readmitted within 7 days of hospital discharge.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study at a single urban academic hospital examining adult patients discharged from the medical service and readmitted to the same hospital within 7 days between January and December 2018. The primary outcome was diagnostic error presence, identified through two-physician adjudication using validated tools. Secondary outcomes included severity of error impact and characterisation of diagnostic process failures contributing to error.

Results

There were 391 cases of unplanned 7-day readmission (5.2% of 7507 discharges), of which 376 (96.2%) were reviewed. Twenty-one (5.6%) admissions were found to contain at least one diagnostic error during the index admission. The most common problem areas in the diagnostic process included failure to order needed test(s) (n=11, 52.4%), erroneous clinician interpretation of test(s) (n=10, 47.6%) and failure to consider the correct diagnosis (n=8, 38.1%). Nineteen (90.5%) of the diagnostic errors resulted in moderate clinical impact, primarily due to short-term morbidity or contribution to the readmission.

Conclusion

The prevalence of diagnostic error among 7-day medical readmissions was 5.6%. The most common drivers of diagnostic error were related to clinician diagnostic reasoning. Efforts to reduce diagnostic error should include strategies to augment diagnostic reasoning and improve clinician decision-making around diagnostic studies.

Teaching Clinical Reasoning and Critical Thinking: From Cognitive Theory to Practical Application

Teaching clinical reasoning is challenging, particularly in the time-pressured and complicated environment of the ICU. Clinical reasoning is a complex process in which one identifies and prioritizes pertinent clinical data to develop a hypothesis and a plan to confirm or refute that hypothesis. Clinical reasoning is related to and dependent on critical thinking skills, which are defined as one's capacity to engage in higher cognitive skills such as analysis, synthesis, and self-reflection. This article reviews how an understanding of the cognitive psychological principles that contribute to effective clinical reasoning has led to strategies for teaching clinical reasoning in the ICU. With familiarity with System 1 and System 2 thinking, which represent intuitive vs analytical cognitive processing pathways, respectively, the clinical teacher can use this framework to identify cognitive patterns in clinical reasoning. In addition, the article describes how internal and external factors in the clinical environment can affect students' and trainees' clinical reasoning abilities, as well as their capacity to understand and incorporate strategies for effective critical thinking into their practice. Utilizing applicable cognitive psychological theory, the relevant literature on teaching clinical reasoning is reviewed, and specific strategies to effectively teach clinical reasoning and critical thinking in the ICU and other clinical settings are provided. Definitions, operational descriptions, and justifications for a variety of teaching interventions are discussed, including the "one-minute preceptor" model, the use of concept or mechanism maps, and cognitive de-biasing strategies.