Suppr超能文献

急诊科医师临床推理的范围综述。

A Scoping Review of Physicians' Clinical Reasoning in Emergency Departments.

机构信息

Prehospital Emergency Care Service (SAMU 67), Strasbourg University Hospital, and the Centre for Training and Research in Health Sciences Education (CFRPS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.

Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, McGill University and Montreal Children's Hospital, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Centre for Medical Education, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Feb;75(2):206-217. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.06.023. Epub 2019 Aug 29.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Clinical reasoning is considered a core competency of physicians. Yet there is a paucity of research on clinical reasoning specifically in emergency medicine, as highlighted in the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to examine the state of research on clinical reasoning in this specialty. Our team, composed of content and methodological experts, identified 3,763 articles in the literature, 95 of which were included.

RESULTS

Most studies were published after 2000. Few studies focused on the cognitive processes involved in decisionmaking (ie, clinical reasoning). Of these, many confirmed findings from the general literature on clinical reasoning; specifically, the role of both intuitive and analytic processes. We categorized factors that influence decisionmaking into contextual, patient, and physician factors. Many studies focused on decisions in regard to investigations and admission. Test ordering is influenced by physicians' experience, fear of litigation, and concerns about malpractice. Fear of litigation and malpractice also increases physicians' propensity to admit patients. Context influences reasoning but findings pertaining to specific factors, such as patient flow and workload, were inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Many studies used designs such as descriptive or correlational methods, limiting the strength of findings. Many gray areas persist, in which studies are either scarce or yield conflicting results. The findings of this scoping review should encourage us to intensify research in the field of emergency physicians' clinical reasoning, particularly on the cognitive processes at play and the factors influencing them, using appropriate theoretical frameworks and more robust methods.

摘要

研究目的

临床推理被认为是医生的核心能力之一。然而,正如文献中所强调的那样,关于急诊医学中临床推理的研究还很少。

方法

我们进行了范围综述,以检查该专业临床推理研究的现状。我们的团队由内容和方法学专家组成,在文献中确定了 3763 篇文章,其中 95 篇被纳入。

结果

大多数研究都是在 2000 年后发表的。很少有研究关注决策过程中的认知过程(即临床推理)。其中,许多研究证实了一般临床推理文献中的发现;具体来说,直觉和分析过程都发挥了作用。我们将影响决策的因素分为情境、患者和医生因素。许多研究都集中在检查和入院决策上。检查的安排受到医生经验、对诉讼的恐惧和对医疗事故的担忧的影响。对诉讼和医疗事故的恐惧也增加了医生收治患者的倾向。情境会影响推理,但关于具体因素(如患者流量和工作量)的发现并不一致。

结论

许多研究使用描述性或相关性方法等设计,限制了研究结果的强度。许多灰色地带仍然存在,要么研究稀少,要么研究结果相互矛盾。这篇范围综述的结果应该鼓励我们加强对急诊医师临床推理领域的研究,特别是关于发挥作用的认知过程和影响这些过程的因素,使用适当的理论框架和更强大的方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验