Lee Ching-Yi, Lai Hung-Yi, Lee Ching-Hsin, Chen Mi-Mi, Yau Sze-Yuen
Department of Neurosurgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
PeerJ. 2024 Mar 6;12:e17042. doi: 10.7717/peerj.17042. eCollection 2024.
Collaborative clinical reasoning (CCR) among healthcare professionals is crucial for maximizing clinical outcomes and patient safety. This scoping review explores CCR to address the gap in understanding its definition, structure, and implications.
A scoping review was undertaken to examine CCR related studies in healthcare. Medline, PsychInfo, SciVerse Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Inclusion criteria included full-text articles published between 2011 to 2020. Search terms included cooperative, collaborative, shared, team, collective, reasoning, problem solving, decision making, combined with clinical or medicine or medical, but excluded shared decision making.
A total of 24 articles were identified in the review. The review reveals a growing interest in CCR, with 14 articles emphasizing the decision-making process, five using Multidisciplinary Team-Metric for the Observation of Decision Making (MDTs-MODe), three exploring CCR theory, and two focusing on the problem-solving process. Communication, trust, and team dynamics emerge as key influencers in healthcare decision-making. Notably, only two articles provide specific CCR definitions.
While decision-making processes dominate CCR studies, a notable gap exists in defining and structuring CCR. Explicit theoretical frameworks, such as those proposed by Blondon et al. and Kiesewetter et al., are crucial for advancing research and understanding CCR dynamics within collaborative teams. This scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of CCR research, revealing a growing interest and diversity in the field. The review emphasizes the need for explicit theoretical frameworks, citing Blondon et al. and Kiesewetter et al. The broader landscape of interprofessional collaboration and clinical reasoning requires exploration.
医疗保健专业人员之间的协作临床推理（CCR）对于最大化临床结果和患者安全至关重要。本范围综述探讨CCR，以填补在理解其定义、结构和影响方面的空白。
进行了一项范围综述，以检查医疗保健领域中与CCR相关的研究。检索了Medline、PsychInfo、SciVerse Scopus和科学引文索引数据库。纳入标准包括2011年至2020年期间发表的全文文章。检索词包括合作的、协作的、共享的、团队的、集体的、推理、问题解决、决策，并与临床或医学或医疗相结合，但不包括共同决策。
综述共识别出24篇文章。该综述显示对CCR的兴趣日益增加，其中14篇文章强调决策过程，5篇使用多学科团队决策观察指标（MDTs-MODe），3篇探讨CCR理论，2篇关注问题解决过程。沟通、信任和团队动态成为医疗保健决策中的关键影响因素。值得注意的是，只有两篇文章提供了具体的CCR定义。
虽然决策过程在CCR研究中占主导地位，但在定义和构建CCR方面存在明显差距。明确的理论框架，如布隆登等人和基泽韦特等人提出的框架，对于推进研究和理解协作团队中的CCR动态至关重要。本范围综述提供了CCR研究的全面概述，揭示了该领域日益增长的兴趣和多样性。该综述强调需要明确的理论框架，引用了布隆登等人和基泽韦特等人的观点。跨专业协作和临床推理的更广泛领域需要探索。
