From Context Comes Expertise: How Do Expert Emergency Physicians Use Their Know-Who to Make Decisions?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Decisionmaking is influenced by the environment in which it takes place. The objective of our study was to explore the influence of the specific features of the emergency department (ED) environment on decisionmaking. In this paper, we specifically report on the way emergency physicians use their knowledge of their collaborators to make their decisions. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study on emergency physicians recruited in 3 French hospitals. Physicians were equipped with a microcamera to record their clinical activity from their "own-point-of-view perspective." Semistructured interviews, based on viewing the video, were held with each physician after an actual clinical encounter with a patient. They were then analyzed thematically, using constant comparison and matrices, to identify the central themes. RESULTS: Fifteen expert emergency physicians were interviewed. Almost all of them reported using their knowledge of other health care professionals to assess the seriousness of the patient's overall condition (sometimes even before his or her arrival in the ED) to optimize the patient's treatment and to anticipate future care. CONCLUSION: Emergency physicians interact with many other health care workers during the different stages of the patient's management. The many ways in which experts use their knowledge of other health care professionals to make decisions puts traditional conceptions of expert knowledge into perspective and opens avenues for future research.

Interprofessional team debriefings with or without an instructor after a simulated crisis scenario: An exploratory case study.

The value of debriefing after an interprofessional simulated crisis is widely recognised; however, little is known about the content of debriefings and topics that prompt reflection. This study aimed to describe the content and topics that facilitate reflection among learners in two types of interprofessional team debriefings (with or without an instructor) following simulated practice. Interprofessional operating room (OR) teams (one anaesthesia trainee, one surgical trainee, and one staff circulating OR nurse) managed a simulated crisis scenario and were randomised to one of two debriefing groups. Within-team groups used low-level facilitation (i.e., no instructor but a one-page debriefing form based on the Ottawa Global Rating Scale). The instructor-led group used high-level facilitation (i.e., gold standard instructor-led debriefing). All debriefings were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed using the inductive qualitative methodology. Thirty-seven interprofessional team-debriefing sessions were included in the analysis. Regardless of group allocation (within-team or instructor-led), the debriefings centred on targeted crisis resource management (CRM) content (i.e., communication, leadership, situation awareness, roles, and responsibilities). In both types of debriefings, three themes emerged as topics for entry points into reflection: (1) the process of the debriefing itself, (2) experience of the simulation model, including simulation fidelity, and (3) perceived performance, including the assessment of CRM. Either with or without an instructor, interprofessional teams focused their debriefing discussion on targeted CRM content. We report topics that allowed learners to enter reflection. This is important for understanding how to maximise learning opportunities when creating education activities for healthcare providers that work in interprofessional settings.

How and when do expert emergency physicians generate and evaluate diagnostic hypotheses? A qualitative study using head-mounted video cued-recall interviews.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The ability to make a diagnosis is a crucial skill in emergency medicine. Little is known about the way emergency physicians reach a diagnosis. This study aims to identify how and when, during the initial patient examination, emergency physicians generate and evaluate diagnostic hypotheses. METHODS: We carried out a qualitative research project based on semistructured interviews with emergency physicians. The interviews concerned management of an emergency situation during routine medical practice. They were associated with viewing the video recording of emergency situations filmed in an "own-point-of-view" perspective. RESULTS: The emergency physicians generated an average of 5 diagnostic hypotheses. Most of these hypotheses were generated before meeting the patient or within the first 5 minutes of the meeting. The hypotheses were then rank ordered within the context of a verification procedure based on identifying key information. These tasks were usually accomplished without conscious effort. No hypothesis was completely confirmed or refuted until the results of investigations were available. CONCLUSION: The generation and rank ordering of diagnostic hypotheses is based on the activation of cognitive processes, enabling expert emergency physicians to process environmental information and link it to past experiences. The physicians seemed to strive to avoid the risk of error by remaining aware of the possibility of alternative hypotheses as long as they did not have the results of investigations. Understanding the diagnostic process used by emergency physicians provides interesting ideas for training residents in a specialty in which the prevalence of reasoning errors leading to incorrect diagnoses is high.

Testing the validity of three acute care assessment tools for assessing residents' performance during in situ simulation: the ACAT-SimSit study.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of technical and nontechnical skills in emergency medicine requires reliable and usable tools. Three Acute Care Assessment Tools (ACATs) have been developed to assess medical learners in their management of cardiac arrest (ACAT-CA), coma (ACAT-coma) and acute respiratory failure (ACAT-ARF). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the reliability and usability of the three ACATs when used for in situ (bedside) simulation. METHODS: This prospective multicenter validation study tested ACATs using interprofessional in situ simulations in seven emergency departments and invited training residents to participate in them. Each session was rated by two independent raters using ACAT. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess interrater reliability, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each ACAT. The correlation between ACATs' scores and the learners' level of performance was also assessed. Finally, a questionnaire and two focus groups were used to assess the usability of the ACATs. RESULTS: A total of 104 in situ simulation sessions, including 85 residents, were evaluated by 37 raters. The ICC for ACAT-CA, ACAT-coma and ACAT-ARF were 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93-0.98], 0.89 (95% CI, 0.77-0.95) and 0.92 (95%CI 0.83-0.96), respectively. The Cronbach's alphas were 0.79, 0.80 and 0.73, respectively. The ACAT-CA and ARF showed good construct validity, as third-year residents obtained significantly higher scores than first-year residents ( P  < 0.001; P  < 0.019). The raters supported the usability of the tools, even though they expressed concerns regarding the use of simulations in a summative way. CONCLUSION: This study reported that the three ACATs showed good external validity and usability.

Within-team debriefing versus instructor-led debriefing for simulation-based education: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of an interprofessional within-team debriefing with that of an instructor-led debriefing on team performance during a simulated crisis. BACKGROUND: Although instructor-led simulation debriefing is considered the "gold standard" in team-based simulation education, cost and logistics are limiting factors for its implementation. Within-team debriefing, led by the individuals of the team itself rather than an external instructor, has the potential to address these limitations. METHODS: One hundred twenty subjects were grouped into 40 operating room teams consisting of 1 anesthesia trainee, 1 surgical trainee, and 1 staff circulating operating room nurse. All teams managed a simulated crisis scenario (pretest). Teams were then randomized to either a within-team debriefing group or an instructor-led debriefing group. In the within-team debriefing group, the teams reviewed the video of their scenario by themselves. The teams in the instructor-led debriefing group reviewed their scenario guided by a trained instructor. Immediately after debriefing, all teams managed a different intraoperative crisis scenario (posttest). All sessions were videotaped. Blinded expert examiners used the validated Team Emergency Assessment Measure scale to assess crisis resource management performance of all teams in random order. RESULT: Team performance significantly improved from pretest to posttest (P = 0.008) regardless of the type of debriefing. There was no significant difference in the degree of improvement between within-team debriefing and instructor-led debriefing (P = 0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Within-team debriefing results in measurable improvements in team performance in simulated crisis scenarios. This form of debriefing may be as effective as instructor-led team debriefing, which could improve resource utilization and feasibility of team-based simulation (NCT01067378).

Usability and reproducibility of three tools to assess medical students and residents in emergency medicine.

OBJECTIVES: It is critical to assess competency of medical students and residents in emergency medicine (EM) during undergraduate and graduate medical education. However, very few valid tools exist to assess both technical and nontechnical skills in the specific context of EM. Three Acute Care Assessment Tools (ACAT 1, 2, and 3) have been previously developed for three acute care conditions: cardiac arrest (1), coma (2), and acute respiratory failure (3). This study aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of the tools. METHODS: The tool was tested using recorded videos of simulation sessions of fourth year medical students and first year residents in EM. Raters independently reviewed the videos two times in a 3-month interval, and interrater and intrarater reliability using intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated. Secondary endpoints included the completeness rate and relevance of the ACAT. RESULTS: Sixty-two sessions were recorded and 48 videos analyzed (18 for CA and 15 for both respiratory failure and coma. The learners were residents in 32 (66%) of videos. Interrater reliability was excellent (ICC >0.9 for all three contexts) and so was the intrarater reliability (>0.88), both upon first review (month 0, M0) and at 3 months (M3). The usability of the ACAT was good, with a completeness of the items that ranged from 96% to 100%. Only one item of the ACAT 1 had a relevance of 27%, as it could not be completed in 13 scenarios out of 18. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate educators can evaluate students similarly utilizing video recordings of simulated medical scenario. The excellent completeness of the rated items advocated for good usability. The three ACATs can be utilized to assess for completeness of predefined tasks in three acute care broad scenario in a competency-based medical education framework.

Impact of training periods in the emergency department on the motivation of health care students to learn.

OBJECTIVES: Motivation is one of the most important factors for learning and achievement. The perceived value of the task, perceptions of self-efficacy and beliefs about control of learning are the main determinants of motivation. They are highly influenced by the individual's personal history and especially by significant past experiences. We assessed the impact of training periods in the emergency department on the motivation of health care students to learn in the field of emergency medicine. METHODS: A survey was conducted in 2008 with 112 undergraduate medical students and 201 undergraduate nursing students attending an emergency medicine academic programme. At the beginning of the course, the students completed an anonymous 26-item questionnaire to assess their motivational orientations. RESULTS: Perceived task value was higher for students who had previously attended a training period in the emergency department (P = 0.002). Perceived self-efficacy was depressed when the respondent had been confronted with negative outcome events (P < 0.001). Control of learning beliefs was affected negatively in students who had attended a training period in the emergency department (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Motivation is a major contributor to the success of learning. Training periods in the emergency department can have positive and negative impacts on the learning motivation of medical and nursing students in the field of emergency medicine. Ideally, and in terms of increasing motivation, health care students should gain experiential learning in the emergency department before attending a corresponding academic course. During this period, tutors should provide appropriate supervision and feedback in order to support self-efficacy perception and learning control beliefs.

A Novel Approach to Study Medical Decision Making in the Clinical Setting: The "Own-point-of-view" Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Making diagnostic and therapeutic decisions is a critical activity among physicians. It relies on the ability of physicians to use cognitive processes and specific knowledge in the context of a clinical reasoning. This ability is a core competency in physicians, especially in the field of emergency medicine where the rate of diagnostic errors is high. Studies that explore medical decision making in an authentic setting are increasing significantly. They are based on the use of qualitative methods that are applied at two separate times: 1) a video recording of the subject's actual activity in an authentic setting and 2) an interview with the subject, supported by the video recording. Traditionally, activity is recorded from an "external perspective"; i.e., a camera is positioned in the room in which the consultation takes place. This approach has many limits, both technical and with respect to the validity of the data collected. OBJECTIVES: The article aims at 1) describing how decision making is currently being studied, especially from a qualitative standpoint, and the reasons why new methods are needed, and 2) reporting how we used an original, innovative approach to study decision making in the field of emergency medicine and findings from these studies to guide further the use of this method. The method consists in recording the subject's activity from his own point of view, by fixing a microcamera on his temple or the branch of his glasses. An interview is then held on the basis of this recording, so that the subject being interviewed can relive the situation, to facilitate the explanation of his reasoning with respect to his decisions and actions. RESULTS: We describe how this method has been used successfully in investigating medical decision making in emergency medicine. We provide details on how to use it optimally, taking into account the constraints associated with the practice of emergency medicine and the benefits in the study of clinical reasoning. CONCLUSION: The "own-point-of-view" video technique is a promising method to study clinical decision making in emergency medicine. It is a powerful tool to stimulate recall and help physicians make their reasoning explicit, thanks to a greater psychological immersion.

Do emergency physicians trust their patients?

The primary focus of research on the physician-patient relationship has been on patients' trust in their physicians. In this study, we explored physicians' trust in their patients. We held semi-structured interviews with expert emergency physicians concerning a patient they had just been managing. The physicians had been equipped with a head-mounted micro camera to film the encounter from an "own point of view perspective". The footage was used to stimulate recall during the interviews. Several participants made judgments on the reliability of their patients' accounts from the very beginning of the encounter. If accounts were not deemed reliable, participants implemented a variety of specific strategies in pursuing their history taking, i.e. checking for consistency by asking the same question at several points in the interview, cross-referencing information, questioning third-parties, examining the patient record, and systematically collecting data held to be objective. Our study raises the question of the influence of labeling patients as "reliable" or "unreliable" on their subsequent treatment in the emergency department. Further work is necessary to examine the accuracy of these judgments, the underlying cognitive processes (i.e. analytic versus intuitive) and their influence on decision-making.

Insights into emergency physicians' minds in the seconds before and into a patient encounter.

Clinical reasoning is a core competency in medical practice. No study has explored clinical reasoning occurring before a clinical encounter, when physicians obtain preliminary information about the patient, and during the first seconds of the observation phase. This paper aims to understand what happens in emergency physicians' minds when they acquire initial information about a patient, and when they first meet a patient. The authors carried out in-depth interviews based on the video recordings of emergency situations filmed in an "own-point-of-view-perspective". 15 expert emergency physicians were interviewed between 2011 and 2012. Researchers analysed data using an interpretive approach based on thematic analysis and constant comparison. Almost all participants used a few critical pieces of information to generate hypotheses even before they actually met the patient. Pre-encounter hypotheses played a key role in the ensuing encounter by directing initial data gathering. Initial data, collected within the first few seconds of the encounter, included the patient's position on the stretcher, the way they had been prepared, their facial expression, their breathing, and their skin colour. Physicians also rapidly appraised the seriousness of the patient's overall condition, which determined their initial goals, i.e. initiating emergency treatment or pursuing the diagnostic investigation. The study brings new insights on what happens at the very beginning of the encounter between emergency physicians and patients. The results obtained from an innovative methodological approach open avenues for the development of clinical reasoning in learners.

An analysis of clinical reasoning through a recent and comprehensive approach: the dual-process theory.

CONTEXT: Clinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make diagnoses and decisions. It is considered as the physician's most critical competence, and has been widely studied by physicians, educationalists, psychologists and sociologists. Since the 1970s, many theories about clinical reasoning in medicine have been put forward. PURPOSE: This paper aims at exploring a comprehensive approach: the "dual-process theory", a model developed by cognitive psychologists over the last few years. DISCUSSION: After 40 years of sometimes contradictory studies on clinical reasoning, the dual-process theory gives us many answers on how doctors think while making diagnoses and decisions. It highlights the importance of physicians' intuition and the high level of interaction between analytical and non-analytical processes. However, it has not received much attention in the medical education literature. The implications of dual-process models of reasoning in terms of medical education will be discussed.

Gender stereotypes: an explanation to the underrepresentation of women in emergency medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Women are underrepresented in emergency medicine (EM) residency programs in comparison with many other specialties. The reasons for this are unclear. One hypothesis is that negative gender stereotypes about EM careers might exist among female medical students. In the field of education, negative gender stereotypes are known to lead to career avoidance, because they tend to decrease self-efficacy perception. The aims of this study were to assess the prevalence of negative gender stereotypes about EM practice among medical students and to measure the effects of these stereotypes on females' self-efficacy perception toward EM learning. METHODS: A survey was conducted of the 255 third-year medical students from three medical schools who attended a mandatory EM academic program in France. They completed an anonymous questionnaire exploring their gender stereotypes about EM practice and their self-efficacy perception toward EM learning. RESULTS: Gender stereotypes are common among medical students, especially in women. Self-efficacy perception is negatively correlated to female students' belief that EM careers are better suited for men (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Negative gender stereotypes among female medical students may lead to EM career avoidance, because of the decrease in their self-efficacy perception toward EM learning.