Cognitive forcing strategies in clinical decisionmaking

被引:274
作者
Croskerry, P
机构
[1] Capital Hlth, Dept Emergency Med, Dartmouth, NS B2Y 4G8, Canada
[2] Dalhousie Univ, Dept Emergency Med, Halifax, NS B3H 3J5, Canada
[3] Univ Florida, Ctr Safety Emergency Care, Jacksonville, FL USA
[4] Dalhousie Univ, Ctr Safety Emergency Care, Halifax, NS B3H 3J5, Canada
[5] Northwestern Univ, Ctr Safety Emergency Care, Evanston, IL 60208 USA
[6] Brown Univ, Ctr Safety Emergency Care, Providence, RI 02912 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1067/mem.2003.22
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Cognitive errors underlie most diagnostic errors that are made in the course of clinical decisionmaking in the emergency department. These errors are universal and are prevalent in the special milieu of the ED. Their properties appear to be distinct from those associated with the performance of procedures. They are often costly, but, importantly for both the patient and the physician, they are also highly preventable. Recent developments in education theory provide a means for minimizing and avoiding diagnostic error. Through the process of metacognition, clinicians can develop cognitive forcing strategies to abort such latent errors. Three levels of cognitive forcing strategies are described: universal, generic, and specific. Specific cognitive forcing strategies provide a formal cognitive debiasing approach to deal with what have previously been described as pitfalls in clinical reasoning. This metacognitive approach can be taught to practicing clinicians and to those in training to inoculate them against making diagnostic errors. The adoption of this method provides a systematic approach to cognitive root-cause analysis in the avoidance of adverse outcomes associated with delayed or missed diagnoses and with the clinical management of specific cases.
引用
收藏
页码:110 / 120
页数:11
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Human error in medicine
[2]   Using information technology to reduce rates of medication errors in hospitals [J].
Bates, DW .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7237) :788-791
[3]  
BORKOWSKI JG, 1987, INTELLIGENCE, V11, P61, DOI 10.1016/0160-2896(87)90027-4
[4]   INCIDENCE OF ADVERSE EVENTS AND NEGLIGENCE IN HOSPITALIZED-PATIENTS - RESULTS OF THE HARVARD MEDICAL-PRACTICE STUDY-I [J].
BRENNAN, TA ;
LEAPE, LL ;
LAIRD, NM ;
HEBERT, L ;
LOCALIO, AR ;
LAWTHERS, AG ;
NEWHOUSE, JP ;
WEILER, PC ;
HIATT, HH .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1991, 324 (06) :370-376
[5]   The Institute of Medicine Report on medical errors - Could it do harm? [J].
Brennan, TA .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (15) :1123-1125
[6]   An objective analysis of process errors in trauma resuscitations [J].
Clarke, JR ;
Spejewski, B ;
Gertner, AS ;
Webber, BL ;
Hayward, CZ ;
Santora, TA ;
Wagner, DK ;
Baker, CC ;
Champion, HR ;
Fabian, TC ;
Lewis, FR ;
Moore, EE ;
Weigelt, JA ;
Eastman, AB ;
Blank-Reid, C .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2000, 7 (11) :1303-1310
[7]  
COHEN MS, 1995, DECISION MAKING ACTI, P36
[8]  
COSBY K, IN PRESS ACAD EMERG
[9]  
Croskerry P, 2001, CJEM, V3, P271
[10]   Achieving quality in clinical decision making: Cognitive strategies and detection of bias [J].
Croskerry, P .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2002, 9 (11) :1184-1204