Department of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2022 Oct 1;210(10):729-735. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001548. Epub 2022 Jun 8.
Cognitive and affective biases impact clinical decision-making in general medicine. This article explores how such biases might specifically affect psychiatrists' attitudes and prescribing patterns regarding two medication classes (stimulants and benzodiazepines) and addresses related issues. To supplement personal observations, selective PubMed narrative literature searches were conducted using relevant title/abstract terms, followed by snowballing for additional pertinent titles. Acknowledging that there are many more types of biases, we describe and use clinical vignettes to illustrate 17 cognitive and affective biases that might influence clinicians' psychopharmacological practices. Factors possibly underlying these biases include temperamental differences and both preprofessional and professional socialization. Mitigating strategies can reduce the potentially detrimental impacts that biases may impose on clinical care. How extensively these biases appear, how they differ among psychiatrists and across classes of medication, and how they might be most effectively addressed to minimize harms deserve further systematic study.
认知和情感偏见会影响一般医学的临床决策。本文探讨了这些偏见可能如何具体影响精神科医生对两类药物(兴奋剂和苯二氮䓬类药物)的态度和处方模式,并讨论了相关问题。为了补充个人观察,我们使用相关的标题/摘要术语对选择性 PubMed 叙述性文献进行了搜索,然后进行了滚雪球式搜索,以获取更多相关的标题。我们承认还有更多类型的偏见,因此描述并使用临床案例来举例说明可能影响临床医生精神药理学实践的 17 种认知和情感偏见。这些偏见背后的潜在因素可能包括气质差异以及前专业和专业社会化。缓解策略可以减少偏见可能对临床护理造成的潜在不利影响。这些偏见出现的程度、它们在精神科医生和药物类别之间的差异,以及如何最有效地解决这些偏见以最大程度地减少伤害,这些都值得进一步进行系统研究。