Does Time Pressure Have a Negative Effect on Diagnostic Accuracy?

PURPOSE: Studies suggest time pressure has negative effects on physicians' working conditions and may lead to suboptimal patient care and medical errors. Experimental evidence supporting this is lacking, however. This study investigated the effect of time pressure on diagnostic accuracy. METHOD: In 2013, senior internal medicine residents at three hospitals in Saudi Arabia were divided randomly into two groups: a time-pressure condition and a control condition without time pressure. Both groups diagnosed eight written clinical cases presented on computers. In the time-pressure condition, after completing each case, participants received information that they were behind schedule. Response time was recorded, and diagnostic accuracy was scored. RESULTS: The 23 participants in the time-pressure condition spent significantly less time diagnosing the cases (mean = 96.00 seconds) than the 19 control participants (mean = 151.97 seconds) (P < .001). Participants under time pressure had a significantly lower diagnostic accuracy score (mean = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23-0.43) than participants without time pressure (mean = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.60) (F[1, 41] = 6.90, P = .012, η = 0.15). This suggests participants in the time-pressure condition made on average 37% more errors than control participants. CONCLUSIONS: Time pressure has a negative impact on diagnostic performance. The authors propose that the effect of time pressure on diagnostic accuracy is moderated by both the case difficulty level and the physician's level of experience. Post hoc analyses demonstrated that time pressure affects diagnostic accuracy only if cases are not too difficult and physicians' expertise level is intermediate.

Effectiveness of a training programme for primary care physicians directed at the enhancement of their psychiatric knowledge in Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVE: A substantial number of patients with psychiatric disorders consult primary care physicians for comprehensive health care; however, the diagnosis and effective treatment of psychiatric disorders are deficient in primary health care. The aim of this intervention study is to assess the pre- and post-psychiatric training knowledge of primary care physicians. METHOD: The setting of this study was Buraidah Mental Health Hospital. The research design consisted of a pre- and post-test comparison of physicians' responses (n = 70) with a control group (n = 40). The instrument includes a Knowledge Test comprised of 50 questions on primary care psychiatry. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups with regard to several confounding sociodemographic variables, but physicians' age and duration of medical practice were significantly higher in the control group. There were significant differences between knowledge of intervention and controls prior to psychiatric training and this difference was further highly significant post-psychiatric training. The gain in knowledge of intervention group post-psychiatric training was highly significant as compared to pre-test knowledge but there was no difference in the knowledge of the control group. CONCLUSION: Psychiatric training courses can enhance physicians' knowledge in clinical psychiatry with possible psychiatric implications, including early diagnosis and better treatment of primary care patients with psychiatric problems.

Assessing Students in Community Settings: The Role of Peer Evaluation.

The assessment of students in community settings faces unique difficulties. Since students are usually posted in small groups in different community settings and since the learning (largely) takes place outside the classroom, assessing student performance becomes an intrinsically complex endeavor. In this article, the proposition is made and tested that peers may be used to accurately assess particular aspects of performance, in particular those which need extensive and close observation. Examples are: Effort displayed while working in a community, quality of the interaction with that community, display of leadership, and subject-matter contributions.The Faculty of Medicine of the University of Gezira, a community-based medical school, uses peer evaluation to assess these attributes of its students. Thirty four students divided into three groups participated in the present study. Goals of the study were to appraise the reliability, validity and acceptability of an instrument designed to measure these characteristics. Reliability was estimated using generalizability theory. A high generalizability coefficient (G) was found when all items were taken into account. In this case, G equaled 0.97. Its sub-scales each had also fairly high G-coefficients: Effort: 0.89, Subject-matter Contribution: 0.91, Community Interaction: 0.89, and Leadership: 0,88 respectively. The validity of the instrument was studied using confirmatory factor analysis. The results suggested that the proposed model of peer evaluation is reasonably valid. Finally, the instrument turned out to be quite acceptable to students.