Can degrading information about patient symptoms in vignettes alter clinical reasoning in paramedics and paramedic students? An experimental application of fuzzy trace theory
{"title":"Can degrading information about patient symptoms in vignettes alter clinical reasoning in paramedics and paramedic students? An experimental application of fuzzy trace theory","authors":"Toby Keene , Eryn Newman , Kristen Pammer","doi":"10.1016/j.auec.2023.02.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Research has shown paramedics form rapid intuitive impressions on first, meeting a patient and these impressions subsequently affected their clinical reasoning. We report an experiment where theory-based interventions are developed with the goal of reducing reliance on intuitive reasoning by paramedics and paramedic students in simulated patients.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Australian paramedics (n = 213; 49% female) and paramedicine students (n = 83; 55% female) attending paramedic conferences completed a 2 × 2 fully between participants experiment. They saw a written clinical vignette designed to be representative of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) in which key clinical information was precise or degraded (stimulus), they then either chose the single most likely diagnosis from a list, or ranked competing diagnoses (response). Outcome variables were diagnostic rate and response time.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were no differences in the proportion of participants choosing ACS across the four stimulus-response conditions (0.75 [0.65, 0.84] vs 0.79 [0.68, 0.87] vs, 0.78 [0.65, 0.87] vs 0.72 [0.59, 0.82], p = 0.42)</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This is the first study attempting to experimentally examine clinical reasoning in paramedics using a theory-based intervention. Neither of the interventions tested succeeded in altering measures of clinical reasoning. Similar to previous research on physicians, paramedic reasoning appears robust to manipulation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55979,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Emergency Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588994X23000076","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Research has shown paramedics form rapid intuitive impressions on first, meeting a patient and these impressions subsequently affected their clinical reasoning. We report an experiment where theory-based interventions are developed with the goal of reducing reliance on intuitive reasoning by paramedics and paramedic students in simulated patients.
Method
Australian paramedics (n = 213; 49% female) and paramedicine students (n = 83; 55% female) attending paramedic conferences completed a 2 × 2 fully between participants experiment. They saw a written clinical vignette designed to be representative of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) in which key clinical information was precise or degraded (stimulus), they then either chose the single most likely diagnosis from a list, or ranked competing diagnoses (response). Outcome variables were diagnostic rate and response time.
Results
There were no differences in the proportion of participants choosing ACS across the four stimulus-response conditions (0.75 [0.65, 0.84] vs 0.79 [0.68, 0.87] vs, 0.78 [0.65, 0.87] vs 0.72 [0.59, 0.82], p = 0.42)
Conclusion
This is the first study attempting to experimentally examine clinical reasoning in paramedics using a theory-based intervention. Neither of the interventions tested succeeded in altering measures of clinical reasoning. Similar to previous research on physicians, paramedic reasoning appears robust to manipulation.
期刊介绍:
Australasian Emergency Care is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to supporting emergency nurses, physicians, paramedics and other professionals in advancing the science and practice of emergency care, wherever it is delivered. As the official journal of the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA), Australasian Emergency Care is a conduit for clinical, applied, and theoretical research and knowledge that advances the science and practice of emergency care in original, innovative and challenging ways. The journal serves as a leading voice for the emergency care community, reflecting its inter-professional diversity, and the importance of collaboration and shared decision-making to achieve quality patient outcomes. It is strongly focussed on advancing the patient experience and quality of care across the emergency care continuum, spanning the pre-hospital, hospital and post-hospital settings within Australasia and beyond.