Emergency Medicine Resident Perceptions About the Need for Increased Training in Communicating Diagnostic Uncertainty

Addressing diagnostic uncertainty and excellence in emergency care-from multicountry policy analysis to communication practice in Australian emergency departments: a multimethod study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Communication failings may compromise the diagnostic process and pose a risk to quality of care and patient safety. With a focus on emergency care settings, this project aims to examine the critical role and impact of communication in the diagnostic process, including in diagnosis-related health and research policy, and diagnostic patient-clinician interactions in emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This project uses a qualitatively driven multimethod design integrating findings from two research studies to gain a comprehensive understanding of the impact of context and communication on diagnostic excellence from diverse perspectives. Study 1 will map the diagnostic policy and practice landscape in Australia, New Zealand and the USA through qualitative expert interviews and policy analysis. Study 2 will investigate the communication of uncertainty in diagnostic interactions through a qualitative ethnography of two metropolitan Australian ED sites incorporating observations, field notes, video-recorded interactions, semistructured interviews and written medical documentation, including linguistic analysis of recorded diagnostic interactions and written documentation. This study will also feature a description of clinician, patient and carer perspectives on, and involvement in, interpersonal diagnostic interactions and will provide crucial new insights into the impact of communicating diagnostic uncertainty for these groups. Project-spanning patient and stakeholder involvement strategies will build research capacity among healthcare consumers via educational workshops, engage with community stakeholders in analysis and build consensus among stakeholders.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The project has received ethical approvals from the Human Research Ethics Committee at ACT Health, Northern Sydney Local Health District and the Australian National University. Findings will be disseminated to academic peers, clinicians and healthcare consumers, health policy-makers and the general public, using local and international academic and consumer channels (journals, evidence briefs and conferences) and outreach activities (workshops and seminars).

Identifying Facilitators and Inhibitors of Shared Understanding: An Ethnography of Diagnosis Communication in Acute Medical Settings

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Communication is important in determining how patients understand the diagnostic process. Empirical studies involving direct observation of communication within diagnostic processes are relatively limited. This ethnographic study aimed to identify communicative practices facilitating or inhibiting shared understanding between patients and doctors in UK acute secondary care settings.

METHODS

Data were collected in acute medical sectors of three English hospitals. Researchers observed doctors as they assessed patients; semistructured interviews were undertaken with doctors and patients directly afterwards. Patients were also interviewed 2-4 weeks later. Case studies of individual encounters (consisting of these interviews and observational notes) were created, and were cross-examined by an interdisciplinary team to identify divergence and convergence between doctors' and patients' narratives. These data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

We conducted 228 h of observation, 24 doctor interviews, 32 patient interviews and 15 patient follow-up interviews. Doctors varied in their communication. Patient diagnostic understanding was sometimes misaligned with that of their doctors; interviews revealed that they often made incorrect assumptions to make sense of the fragmented information received. Thematic analysis identified communicative practices that seemed to facilitate, or inhibit, shared diagnostic understanding between patient and doctor, revealing three themes: (1) communicating what has been understood from the medical record, (2) sharing the thought process and diagnostic reasoning and (3) closing the loop and discharge communication. Shared understanding was best fostered by clear communication about the diagnostic process, what had already been done and what was achievable in acute settings. Written information presents an underutilised tool in such communication.

CONCLUSIONS

In UK acute secondary settings, the provision of more information about the diagnostic process often fostered shared understanding between doctor and patient, helping to minimise the confusion and dissatisfaction that can result from misaligned expectations or conclusions about the diagnosis, and the uncertainty therein.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A patient and public involvement group (of a range of ages and backgrounds) was consulted. They contributed to the design of the protocol, including the timing of interviews, the acceptability of a follow-up telephone interview, the development of the interview guides and the participant information sheets.

Integrating Hospice and Palliative Medicine Education Within the American Board of Emergency Medicine Model

Background

Hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) is a board-certified subspecialty within emergency medicine (EM), but prior studies have shown that EM residents do not receive sufficient training in HPM. Experts in HPM-EM created a consensus list of competencies for HPM training in EM residency. We evaluated how the HPM competencies integrate within the American Board of Emergency Medicine Milestones, which include the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine (EM Model) and the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) list.

Methods

Three emergency physicians independently mapped the HPM-EM competencies onto the 2019 EM Model items and the 2021 KSAs. Discrepancies were resolved by a fourth independent reviewer, and the final mapping was reviewed by all team members.

Results

The EM Model included 78% (18/23) of the HPM competencies as a direct match, and we identified recommended areas for incorporating the other five. The KSAs included 43% (10/23). Most HPM competencies included in the KSAs mapped onto at least one level B (minimal necessary for competency) KSA. Three HPM competencies were not clearly included in the EM Model or in the KSAs (treating end-of-life symptoms, caring for the imminently dying, and caring for patients under hospice care).

Conclusion

The majority of HPM-EM competencies are included in the current EM Model and KSAs and correspond to knowledge needed to be competent in EM. Programs relying on the EM Milestones to plan their curriculums may miss training in symptom management and care for patients at the end of life or who are on hospice.

Developing a Framework and Electronic Tool for Communicating Diagnostic Uncertainty in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

IMPORTANCE

Communication of information has emerged as a critical component of diagnostic quality. Communication of diagnostic uncertainty represents a key but inadequately examined element of diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify key elements facilitating understanding and managing diagnostic uncertainty, examine optimal ways to convey uncertainty to patients, and develop and test a novel tool to communicate diagnostic uncertainty in actual clinical encounters.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A 5-stage qualitative study was performed between July 2018 and April 2020, at an academic primary care clinic in Boston, Massachusetts, with a convenience sample of 24 primary care physicians (PCPs), 40 patients, and 5 informatics and quality/safety experts. First, a literature review and panel discussion with PCPs were conducted and 4 clinical vignettes of typical diagnostic uncertainty scenarios were developed. Second, these scenarios were tested during think-aloud simulated encounters with expert PCPs to iteratively draft a patient leaflet and a clinician guide. Third, the leaflet content was evaluated with 3 patient focus groups. Fourth, additional feedback was obtained from PCPs and informatics experts to iteratively redesign the leaflet content and workflow. Fifth, the refined leaflet was integrated into an electronic health record voice-enabled dictation template that was tested by 2 PCPs during 15 patient encounters for new diagnostic problems. Data were thematically analyzed using qualitative analysis software.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Perceptions and testing of content, feasibility, usability, and satisfaction with a prototype tool for communicating diagnostic uncertainty to patients.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 participants were interviewed. A clinician guide and a diagnostic uncertainty communication tool were developed based on the PCP interviews and patient feedback. The optimal tool requirements included 6 key domains: most likely diagnosis, follow-up plan, test limitations, expected improvement, contact information, and space for patient input. Patient feedback on the leaflet was iteratively incorporated into 4 successive versions, culminating in a successfully piloted prototype tool as an end-of-visit voice recognition dictation template with high levels of patient satisfaction for 15 patients with whom the tool was tested.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this qualitative study, a diagnostic uncertainty communication tool was successfully designed and implemented during clinical encounters. The tool demonstrated good workflow integration and patient satisfaction.

Teaching the science of uncertainty

As we increasingly acknowledge the ubiquitous nature of uncertainty in clinical practice (Meyer AN, Giardina TD, Khawaja L, Singh H. Patient and clinician experiences of uncertainty in the diagnostic process: current understanding and future directions. Patient Educ Counsel 2021;104:2606-15; Han PK, Klein WM, Arora NK. Varieties of uncertainty in health care: a conceptual taxonomy. Med Decis Making 2011;31:828-38) and strive to better define this entity (Lee C, Hall K, Anakin M, Pinnock R. Towards a new understanding of uncertainty in medical education. J Eval Clin Pract 2020; Bhise V, Rajan SS, Sittig DF, Morgan RO, Chaudhary P, Singh H. Defining and measuring diagnostic uncertainty in medicine: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2018;33:103-15), as educators we should also design, implement, and evaluate curricula addressing clinical uncertainty. Although frequently encountered, uncertainty is often implicitly referred to rather than explicitly discussed (Gärtner J, Berberat PO, Kadmon M, Harendza S. Implicit expression of uncertainty - suggestion of an empirically derived framework. BMC Med Educ 2020;20:83). Increasing explicit discussion of - and comfort with -uncertainty has the potential to improve diagnostic reasoning and accuracy and improve patient care (Dunlop M, Schwartzstein RM. Reducing diagnostic error in the intensive care unit. Engaging. Uncertainty when teaching clinical reasoning. Scholar;1:364-71). Discussion of both diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty with patients is central to shared decision-making in many contexts as well, (Simpkin AL, Armstrong KA. Communicating uncertainty: a narrative review and framework for future research. J Gen Intern Med 2019;34:2586-91) from the outpatient setting to the inpatient setting, and from undergraduate medical education (UME) trainees to graduate medical education (GME) trainees. In this article, we will explore the current status of how the science of uncertainty is taught from the UME curriculum to the GME curriculum, and describe strategies how uncertainty can be explicitly discussed for all levels of trainees.

Intolerance of uncertainty and attitudes towards persons living with disabilities in medical students: Is there a correlation?

Introduction

Patients living with a disability experience an illness trajectory that may be uncertain. While navigating clinical uncertainty has been well-researched, health professionals' intolerance of uncertainty for patients living with disabilities has yet to be explored. We examined the relationship between medical students' intolerance of uncertainty with their attitudes towards people living with disabilities to better inform curricular efforts.

Methods

We employed a survey-based design consisting of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS) and Disability Attitudes in Healthcare (DAHC) Scale to medical students upon completion of core clerkships (end of third-year of training). Data were de-identified. Mean DAHC and IUS scores were compared with published values via t-test. Linear regression was used to examine IUS/DAHC scores for anonymized students. Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated to assess correlation between IUS and DAHC scores.

Results

Response rate was 97% (268/275 students). Mean IUS score did not differ from previously cited medical student scores, but mean DAHC score was significantly higher than previously cited scores. We observed a statistically-significant relationship between IUS and DAHC scores. Students with greater intolerance of uncertainty had lower scores for disability attitudes [F(1,243) = 8.05, value of p < 0.01], with an R ²-value of 0.032, suggesting that 3% of DAHC score variance can be explained by IUS score changes.

Conclusion

We identified a weak negative correlation between IUS and DAHC scores in medical students. Further research is needed to clarify findings and identify best practices that equip trainees with skills to care for patients with uncertain illness trajectories and patients living with disabilities.

Frequency of medical students' language expressing implicit uncertainty in simulated handovers

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the number and type of implicit expressions of uncertainty by medical students during simulated patient handovers.

METHODS

Eighty-seven volunteer medical students, a convenience sample collected on a first-come, first-served basis, participated in simulated handovers. They each worked with three simulated patients who presented with different chief complaints and personal conditions. The handovers were video recorded and transcribed. A framework of implicit expressions of uncertainty was used to identify and count modifiers that attenuate or strengthen medical information using MAXQDA lexical search. We analysed the findings with respect to the patients' contexts.

RESULTS

Implicit uncertainty expressions which attenuate or strengthen information occurred in almost equal frequency, 1879 (55%) versus 1505 (45%). Attenuators were found most frequently in the category 'Questionable', 1041 (55.4%), strengtheners in the category 'Focused', 1031 (68.5%). Most attenuators and strengtheners were found in the handover of two patients with challenging personal conditions ('angry man', 434 (23.1%) versus 323 (21.5%); 'unfocused woman', 354 (19.4%) versus 322 (21.4%)) and one patient with abnormal laboratory findings ('elevated creatinine', 379 (20.2%) versus 285 (18.9%)).

CONCLUSIONS

Medical students use a variety of implicit expressions of uncertainty in simulated handovers. These findings provide an opportunity for medical educators to design communication courses that raise students' awareness for content-dependent implicit expressions of uncertainty and provide strategies to communicate uncertainty explicitly.

I Don't Have a Diagnosis for You: Preparing Medical Students to Communicate Diagnostic Uncertainty in the Emergency Department

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic uncertainty abounds in medicine, and communication of that uncertainty is critical to the delivery of high-quality patient care. While there has been training in communicating diagnostic uncertainty directed towards residents, a gap remains in preparing medical students to understand and communicate diagnostic uncertainty. We developed a session to introduce medical students to diagnostic uncertainty and to practice communicating uncertainty using a checklist during role-play patient conversations.

METHODS

This virtual session was conducted for third-year medical students at the conclusion of their core clerkships. It consisted of prework, didactic lecture, peer role-play, and debriefing. The prework included reflection prompts and an interactive online module. The role-play featured a patient complaining of abdominal pain being discharged from the emergency department without a confirmed diagnosis. Students participated in the role of patient, provider, or observer.

RESULTS

Data from an anonymous postsession survey (76% response rate; 202 of 265 students) indicated that most students (82%; 152 of 185) felt more comfortable communicating diagnostic uncertainty after the session. A majority (83%; 166 of 201) indicated the session was useful, and most (81%; 149 of 184) indicated it should be included in the curriculum.

DISCUSSION

This virtual session requires few facilitators; has peer role-play, eliminating the need for standardized patients; and is adaptable for in-person teaching. As its goal was to introduce an approach to communicating diagnostic uncertainty, not achieve mastery, students were not individually assessed for proficiency using the Uncertainty Communication Checklist. Students felt the session intervention was valuable.

Towards a medical school curriculum for uncertainty in clinical practice

Uncertainty abounds in the clinical environment. Medical students, however, are not explicitly prepared for situations of uncertainty in clinical practice, which can cause anxiety and impact well-being. To address this gap, we sought to capture how students felt in various clinical scenarios and identify programs they found helpful as they worked through uncertainty in their clerkships to better inform curriculum that prepares them to acknowledge and navigate this uncertainty. This is an observational cross-sectional study of third-year medical students surveyed at the end of core clerkships. The survey consisted of the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale and Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS). Items asked students to rate preparedness, confidence, and comfort with uncertainty in clinical practice. Items on curricular programs asked students to identify training that prepared them for uncertainty in clerkships, and examined correlations with specific clinical practice uncertainty domains (CPUDs). Spearman's rank-order correlation, Chi-Square, and ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Open responses were analyzed using Braun and Clarke's Framework. Response rate was 98.9% (287/290). GSE was inversely correlated with IUS (p < 0.001). GSE was positively correlated with all CPUDs (p < 0.005). IUS had an inverse correlation with all CPUDs (p < 0.005). Pedagogies with statistically-significant relationships with preparing students for uncertainty, communicating and building relationships with patients during times of uncertainty, and overall well-being included: team debriefs, role plays, case- and team-based learning, story slams, and sharing narratives with peers and faculty (p < 0.05). Qualitatively, students appreciated storytelling, role-modeling of communication strategies, debriefing, and simulations. Strategically immersing specific educational formats into formal curriculum may help cultivate skills needed to prepare students for uncertainty. Clinical debriefs, interprofessional role plays, simulations, communications skills training, instructor emotional vulnerability, storytelling, and peer-to-peer conversations may have the most impact. Further study is required to evaluate their longitudinal impact.

Developing standardized patient-based cases for communication training: lessons learned from training residents to communicate diagnostic uncertainty

Health professions education has benefitted from standardized patient (SP) programs to develop and refine communication and interpersonal skills in trainees. Effective case design is essential to ensure an SP encounter successfully meets learning objectives that are focused on communication skills. Creative, well-designed case scenarios offer learners the opportunity to engage in complex patient encounters, while challenging them to address the personal and emotional contexts in which their patients are situated. Therefore, prior to considering the practical execution of the patient encounter, educators will first need a clear and structured strategy for writing, organizing, and developing cases. The authors reflect on lessons learned in developing standardized patient-based cases to train learners to communicate to patients during times of diagnostic uncertainty, and provide suggestions to develop a set of simulation cases that are both standardized and diverse. Key steps and workflow processes that can assist educators with case design are introduced. The authors review the need to increase awareness of and mitigate existing norms and implicit biases, while maximizing variation in patient diversity. Opportunities to leverage the breadth of emotional dispositions of the SP and the affective domain of a clinical encounter are also discussed as a means to guide future case development and maximize the value of a case for its respective learning outcomes.

Development of the Uncertainty Communication Checklist: A Patient-Centered Approach to Patient Discharge From the Emergency Department

Clear communication with patients upon emergency department (ED) discharge is important for patient safety during the transition to outpatient care. Over one-third of patients are discharged from the ED with diagnostic uncertainty, yet there is no established approach for effective discharge communication in this scenario. From 2017 to 2019, the authors developed the Uncertainty Communication Checklist for use in simulation-based training and assessment of emergency physician communication skills when discharging patients with diagnostic uncertainty. This development process followed the established 12-step Checklist Development Checklist framework and integrated patient feedback into 6 of the 12 steps. Patient input was included as it has potential to improve patient-centeredness of checklists related to assessment of clinical performance. Focus group patient participants from 2 clinical sites were included: Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, and Northwestern University Hospital, Chicago, Illinois.The authors developed a preliminary instrument based on existing checklists, clinical experience, literature review, and input from an expert panel comprising health care professionals and patient advocates. They then refined the instrument based on feedback from 2 waves of patient focus groups, resulting in a final 21-item checklist. The checklist items assess if uncertainty was addressed in each step of the discharge communication, including the following major categories: introduction, test results/ED summary, no/uncertain diagnosis, next steps/follow-up, home care, reasons to return, and general communication skills. Patient input influenced both what items were included and the wording of items in the final checklist. This patient-centered, systematic approach to checklist development is built upon the rigor of the Checklist Development Checklist and provides an illustration of how to integrate patient feedback into the design of assessment tools when appropriate.

Simulation-based mastery learning compared to standard education for discussing diagnostic uncertainty with patients in the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic uncertainty occurs frequently in emergency medical care, with more than one-third of patients leaving the emergency department (ED) without a clear diagnosis. Despite this frequency, ED providers are not adequately trained on how to discuss diagnostic uncertainty with these patients, who often leave the ED confused and concerned. To address this training need, we developed the Uncertainty Communication Education Module (UCEM) to teach physicians how to discuss diagnostic uncertainty. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the UCEM in improving physician communications.

METHODS

The trial is a multicenter, two-arm randomized controlled trial designed to teach communication skills using simulation-based mastery learning (SBML). Resident emergency physicians from two training programs will be randomly assigned to immediate or delayed receipt of the two-part UCEM intervention after completing a baseline standardized patient encounter. The two UCEM components are: 1) a web-based interactive module, and 2) a smart-phone-based game. Both formats teach and reinforce communication skills for patient cases involving diagnostic uncertainty. Following baseline testing, participants in the immediate intervention arm will complete a remote deliberate practice session via a video platform and subsequently return for a second study visit to assess if they have achieved mastery. Participants in the delayed intervention arm will receive access to UCEM and remote deliberate practice after the second study visit. The primary outcome of interest is the proportion of residents in the immediate intervention arm who achieve mastery at the second study visit.

DISCUSSION

Patients' understanding of the care they received has implications for care quality, safety, and patient satisfaction, especially when they are discharged without a definitive diagnosis. Developing a patient-centered diagnostic uncertainty communication strategy will improve safety of acute care discharges. Although use of SBML is a resource intensive educational approach, this trial has been deliberately designed to have a low-resource, scalable intervention that would allow for widespread dissemination and uptake.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04021771). Registration date: July 16, 2019.