Collaborative Diagnostic Conversations Between Clinicians, Patients, and Their Families: A Way to Avoid Diagnostic Errors

Nataly R. Espinoza Suarez MD , Ian Hargraves PhD , Naykky Singh Ospina MD, MSc , Angela Sivly , Andrew Majka MD , Juan P. Brito MD, MSc
{"title":"Collaborative Diagnostic Conversations Between Clinicians, Patients, and Their Families: A Way to Avoid Diagnostic Errors","authors":"Nataly R. Espinoza Suarez MD ,&nbsp;Ian Hargraves PhD ,&nbsp;Naykky Singh Ospina MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Angela Sivly ,&nbsp;Andrew Majka MD ,&nbsp;Juan P. Brito MD, MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.06.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To identify the components of the collaborative diagnostic conversations between clinicians, patients, and their families and how deficiencies in these conversations can lead to diagnostic errors.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>We purposively selected 60 video recordings of clinical encounters that included diagnosis conversations. These videos were obtained from the internal medicine, and family medicine services at Mayo Clinic’s campus in Rochester, Minnesota. These clinical encounters were recorded between November 2017, and December 2021, during the conduct of studies aiming at developing or testing shared decision-making interventions. We followed a critically reflective approach model for data analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We identified 3 components of diagnostic conversations as follows: (1) recognizing diagnostic situations, (2) setting priorities, and (3) creating and reconciling a diagnostic plan. Deficiencies in diagnostic conversations could lead to framing issues in a way that sets diagnostic activities off in an incorrect or undesirable direction, incorrect prioritization of diagnostic concerns, and diagnostic plans of care that are not feasible, desirable, or productive.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We identified 3 clinician-and-patient diagnostic conversation components and mapped them to potential diagnostic errors. This information may inform additional research to identify areas of intervention to decrease the frequency and harm associated with diagnostic errors in clinical practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94132,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/d5/main.PMC10344690.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254245482300036X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To identify the components of the collaborative diagnostic conversations between clinicians, patients, and their families and how deficiencies in these conversations can lead to diagnostic errors.

Patients and Methods

We purposively selected 60 video recordings of clinical encounters that included diagnosis conversations. These videos were obtained from the internal medicine, and family medicine services at Mayo Clinic’s campus in Rochester, Minnesota. These clinical encounters were recorded between November 2017, and December 2021, during the conduct of studies aiming at developing or testing shared decision-making interventions. We followed a critically reflective approach model for data analysis.

Results

We identified 3 components of diagnostic conversations as follows: (1) recognizing diagnostic situations, (2) setting priorities, and (3) creating and reconciling a diagnostic plan. Deficiencies in diagnostic conversations could lead to framing issues in a way that sets diagnostic activities off in an incorrect or undesirable direction, incorrect prioritization of diagnostic concerns, and diagnostic plans of care that are not feasible, desirable, or productive.

Conclusion

We identified 3 clinician-and-patient diagnostic conversation components and mapped them to potential diagnostic errors. This information may inform additional research to identify areas of intervention to decrease the frequency and harm associated with diagnostic errors in clinical practice.

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
临床医生、患者及其家人之间的协作诊断对话:避免诊断错误的方法
目的确定临床医生、患者及其家属之间合作诊断对话的组成部分,以及这些对话中的不足如何导致诊断错误。患者和方法我们有目的地选择了60段临床遭遇的视频记录,其中包括诊断对话。这些视频是从明尼苏达州罗切斯特市梅奥诊所的内科和家庭医学服务中心获得的。这些临床遭遇记录在2017年11月至2021年12月期间,当时正在进行旨在开发或测试共享决策干预措施的研究。我们采用了批判性反思的方法模型进行数据分析。结果我们确定了诊断对话的三个组成部分:(1)识别诊断情况,(2)设定优先级,以及(3)制定和协调诊断计划。诊断对话中的缺陷可能会导致诊断活动朝着不正确或不可取的方向发展,诊断问题的优先顺序不正确,以及诊断护理计划不可行、不可取或不有效。结论我们确定了临床医生和患者诊断对话的3个组成部分,并将它们映射到潜在的诊断错误中。这些信息可以为进一步的研究提供信息,以确定干预领域,从而减少临床实践中与诊断错误相关的频率和危害。
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
Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes
Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes Surgery, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Public Health and Health Policy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
49 days
期刊最新文献
Prognostic Factors and Epidemiology of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis in Southeastern United States Rethinking Measures and Mortality Attribution in Health Care: The Diabetes and Endocrinology Example Lifestyle Medicine in Medical Education: Maximizing Impact
×
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