Improving clinical reasoning and communication during handover: An intervention study of the BRIEF-C tool

BACKGROUND

Existing handover communication tools often lack a clear theoretical foundation, have limited psychometric evidence, and overlook effective communication strategies for enhancing diagnostic reasoning. This oversight becomes critical as communication breakdowns during handovers have been implicated in poor patient care. To address these issues, we developed a structured communication tool: Background, Responsible diagnosis, Included differential diagnosis, Excluded differential diagnosis, Follow-up, and Communication (BRIEF-C). It is informed by cognitive bias theory, shows evidence of reliability and validity of its scores, and includes strategies for actively sending and receiving information in medical handovers.

DESIGN

A pre-test post-test intervention study.

SETTING

Inpatient internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery units at one tertiary care hospital.

INTERVENTION

The BRIEF-C tool was presented to internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery faculty and residents who participated in an in-person educational session, followed by a 2-week period where they practised using it with feedback.

MEASUREMENTS

Clinical handovers were audiorecorded over 1 week for the pre- and again for the post-periods, then transcribed for analysis. Two faculty raters from internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery scored the transcripts of handovers using the BRIEF-C framework. The two raters were blinded to the time periods.

RESULTS

A principal component analysis identified two subscales on the BRIEF-C: diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication, with high interitem consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.82 and 0.99, respectively). One sample t-test indicated significant improvement in diagnostic clinical reasoning (pre-test: M=0.97, SD=0.50; post-test: M=1.31, SD=0.64; t(64)=4.26, p<0.05, medium to large Cohen's d=0.63) and communication (pre-test: M=0.02, SD=0.16; post-test: M=0.48, SD=0.83); t(64)=4.52, p<0.05, large Cohen's d=0.83).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates evidence supporting the reliability and validity of scores on the BRIEF-C as good indicators of diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication shared during handovers.

Diagnostic Reasoning Competency and Accuracy by Nurse Practitioner Students Following the Use of Structured Reflection in Simulation: A Mixed-Methods Experiment

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of structured reflection used during a simulated patient's diagnostic workup on diagnostic reasoning competency and accuracy and explore participants' cognitive bias experience and perceived utility of structured reflection.

BACKGROUND

Reasoning flaws may lead to diagnostic errors. Medical learners who used structured reflection demonstrated improved diagnosis accuracy.

METHOD

Embedded mixed-methods experiment examined diagnostic reasoning competency and accuracy of nurse practitioner students who did and did not use structured reflection. Cognitive bias experience and perceptions of structured reflection's utility were explored.

RESULTS

Diagnostic Reasoning Assessment mean competency scores and categories were not changed. Accuracy trended toward improvement with structured reflection. The theme, diagnostic verification, prompted diagnosis change by both structured reflection users and control participants.

CONCLUSION

Despite no changes in quantitative outcomes, explicit users of structured reflection believed that this strategy is helpful to their reasoning, and control participants used the strategy's components with the same noted benefits.

A metacognitive confidence calibration (MCC) tool to help medical students scaffold diagnostic reasoning in decision-making during high-fidelity patient simulations

The purpose of this study was to 1) help novice students scaffold problem-solving and engage safely in the deliberate practice of diagnostic reasoning and medical decision-making in real time; 2) assess how accurately students gather and apply data in medical reasoning and treatment during high-fidelity patient simulations (HFPSs); 3) identify students' scientific misconceptions related to the case; 4) promote student metacognitive processing, self-assessment, and self-efficacy; and 5) facilitate the explicit calibration of student confidence in deliberate reasoning with patient outcomes. In a mixed-method design, a metacognitive calibration self-assessing (MCC) survey tool was applied to HFPS (n = 80, 20 teams of 6 medical students) and semistructured interviews were conducted with faculty (n = 5). When scored by faculty with a rubric, the mean student accuracy ranged from 23% to 74%, whereas their self-assessment of confidence ranged from 71% to 86%. This result revealed overconfidence bias in novice students regarding the correctness of their wrong responses. The most common misconception identified was inverting cause and effect: metabolic acidosis was pointed to as the cause of the patient's problems rather than a consequence of untreated diabetes mellitus. The most common treatment error was overtreatment, with unnecessary added medication. Interviews with faculty suggested that the MCC tool improved the team process by slowing students down, requiring them to think through their answers, and that overall the tool improved their critical thinking. This study demonstrated the feasibility of using a metacognitive confidence calibration tool to assist novice students in learning safely to make deliberate diagnostic reasoning and decisions on patient care in real time during complex simulations while observing objectively their levels of psychological confidence against patient outcomes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study demonstrates the feasibility of a metacognitive confidence calibration tool (MCC) to assess and promote novices in the learning of diagnostic reasoning and treatment decisions on patient care in real time during high-fidelity patient simulations while comparing confidence and accuracy data and identifying students' scientific misconceptions. Results revealed the presence of overconfidence bias, overtreatment, and the misconception of metabolic acidosis as the cause of the patient's problems rather than a consequence of untreated diabetes mellitus.

A first look at consistency of documentation across care settings during emergency transitions of long-term care residents

BACKGROUND

Documentation during resident transitions from long-term care (LTC) to the emergency department (ED) can be inconsistent, leading to inappropriate care. Inconsistent documentation can lead to undertreatment, inefficiencies and adverse patient outcomes. Many individuals residing in LTC have some form of cognitive impairment and may not be able to advocate for themselves, making accurate and consistent documentation vital to ensuring they receive safe care. We examined documentation consistency related to reason for transfer across care settings during these transitions.

METHODS

We included residents of LTC aged 65 or over who experienced an emergency transition from LTC to the ED via emergency medical services. We used a standardized and pilot-tested tracking tool to collect resident chart/patient record data. We collected data from 38 participating LTC facilities to two participating EDs in Western Canadian provinces. Using qualitative directed content analysis, we categorized documentation from LTC to the ED by sufficiency and clinical consistency.

RESULTS

We included 591 eligible transitions in this analysis. Documentation was coded as consistent, inconsistent, or ambiguous. We identified the most common reasons for transition for consistent cases (falls), ambiguous cases (sudden change in condition) and inconsistent cases (falls). Among inconsistent cases, three subcategories were identified: insufficient reporting, potential progression of a condition during transition and unclear reasons for inconsistency.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared continuing education on documentation across care settings should result in documentation supports geriatric emergency care; on-the-job training needs to support reporting of specific signs and symptoms that warrant an emergent response, and discourage the use of vague descriptors.

Education initiatives in cognitive debiasing to improve diagnostic accuracy in student providers: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The high prevalence of diagnostic errors by health care providers has prompted medical educators to examine cognitive biases and debiasing strategies in an effort to prevent these errors. The National Academy of Medicine hypothesized that explicit diagnostic reasoning education of all health care professionals can improve diagnostic accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this scoping review is to identify, analyze, and summarize the existing literature on student health care providers' use of cognitive debiasing strategies to reduce diagnostic error.

DATA SOURCES

The review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and Scopus databases for debiasing strategies in student provider education yielded 33 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The 33 studies included in this review represent four categories of debiasing strategies: increased medical knowledge or experience (seven studies), guided reflection (eight studies), self-explanation of reasoning (nine studies), and checklists to expand diagnosis considerations (seven studies). The studies were inclusive of medical students and residents; no studies included nurse practitioner (NP) students. Guided reflection, the most clearly defined and implemented strategy, showed the most promise for improvement of diagnostic accuracy. Educational interventions were wide ranging in content and delivery but did yield a path for future research.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

There are myriad debiasing strategies student providers may use to mitigate cognitive bias. Structured reflection and education initiatives demonstrated the most consistent improvements in diagnostic accuracy. Future studies on debiasing strategies must include NP students to understand their response to these initiatives.