The social experience of uncertainty: a qualitative analysis of emergency department care for suspected pneumonia for the design of decision support.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1186/s12911-024-02805-8
Peter Taber, Charlene Weir, Susan L Zickmund, Elizabeth Rutter, Jorie Butler, Barbara E Jones
{"title":"The social experience of uncertainty: a qualitative analysis of emergency department care for suspected pneumonia for the design of decision support.","authors":"Peter Taber, Charlene Weir, Susan L Zickmund, Elizabeth Rutter, Jorie Butler, Barbara E Jones","doi":"10.1186/s12911-024-02805-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study sought to understand the process of clinical decision-making for suspected pneumonia by emergency departments (ED) providers in Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers. The long-term goal of this work is to create clinical decision support tools to reduce unwarranted variation in diagnosis and treatment of suspected pneumonia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 ED clinicians from 9 VA facilities demonstrating variation in antibiotic and hospitalization decisions. Interviews of ED providers focused on understanding decision making for provider-selected pneumonia cases and providers' organizational contexts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thematic analysis identified four salient themes: i) ED decision-making for suspected pneumonia is a social process; ii) the \"diagnosis drives treatment\" paradigm is poorly suited to pneumonia decision-making in the ED; iii) The unpredictability of the ED requires deliberate and effortful information management by providers in CAP decision-making; and iv) the emotional stakes and high uncertainty of pneumonia care drive conservative decision making.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ensuring CDS reflects the realities of clinical work as a socially organized process with high uncertainty may ultimately improve communication between ED and admitting providers, continuity of care and patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"24 1","pages":"386"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657753/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-024-02805-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study sought to understand the process of clinical decision-making for suspected pneumonia by emergency departments (ED) providers in Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers. The long-term goal of this work is to create clinical decision support tools to reduce unwarranted variation in diagnosis and treatment of suspected pneumonia.

Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 ED clinicians from 9 VA facilities demonstrating variation in antibiotic and hospitalization decisions. Interviews of ED providers focused on understanding decision making for provider-selected pneumonia cases and providers' organizational contexts.

Results: Thematic analysis identified four salient themes: i) ED decision-making for suspected pneumonia is a social process; ii) the "diagnosis drives treatment" paradigm is poorly suited to pneumonia decision-making in the ED; iii) The unpredictability of the ED requires deliberate and effortful information management by providers in CAP decision-making; and iv) the emotional stakes and high uncertainty of pneumonia care drive conservative decision making.

Conclusions: Ensuring CDS reflects the realities of clinical work as a socially organized process with high uncertainty may ultimately improve communication between ED and admitting providers, continuity of care and patient outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会经验的不确定性:定性分析对急诊护理疑似肺炎的决策支持设计。
背景:本研究旨在了解退伍军人事务(VA)医疗中心急诊科(ED)提供者对疑似肺炎的临床决策过程。这项工作的长期目标是创建临床决策支持工具,以减少诊断和治疗疑似肺炎的不必要的变化。方法:对来自9家VA机构的16名急诊科临床医生进行半结构化定性访谈,显示抗生素和住院决定的差异。对急诊科医生的访谈集中在了解医生选择的肺炎病例和医生的组织背景的决策。结果:专题分析确定了四个突出主题:1)疑似肺炎的ED决策是一个社会过程;ii)“诊断驱动治疗”模式不适合急诊科的肺炎决策;(iii)可持续发展目标的不可预测性要求供应商在共同发展计划的决策过程中进行审慎和努力的信息管理;iv)肺炎护理的情感风险和高度不确定性驱动保守决策。结论:确保CDS反映临床工作的现实,作为一个具有高度不确定性的社会组织过程,可能最终改善急诊科和住院医生之间的沟通,护理的连续性和患者的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
期刊最新文献
Exploration of the optimal deep learning model for english-Japanese machine translation of medical device adverse event terminology. Causal machine learning models for predicting low birth weight in midwife-led continuity care intervention in North Shoa Zone, Ethiopia. Improving stroke risk prediction by integrating XGBoost, optimized principal component analysis, and explainable artificial intelligence. Tough choices: the experience of family members of critically ill patients participating in ECMO treatment decision-making: a descriptive qualitative study. Patients' and plastic surgeons' experiences with an online patient decision aid for breast reconstruction: considerations for nationwide implementation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1