Suppr超能文献

医学住院医师对医学决策中群体偏见的看法:一项定性研究。

Medical residents' perceptions of group biases in medical decision making: a qualitative study.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Weill Cornell Medicine, P.O. Box 24144, Doha, Qatar.

出版信息

BMC Med Educ. 2024 Jun 14;24(1):661. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05643-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systematic biases in group decision making (i.e., group biases) may result in suboptimal decisions and potentially harm patients. It is not well known how impaired group decision making in patient care may affect medical training. This study aimed to explore medical residents' experiences and perspectives regarding impaired group decision making and the role of group biases in medical decision making.

METHODS

This study used a qualitative approach with thematic analysis underpinned by a social constructionist epistemology. Semi-structured interviews of medical residents were conducted at a single internal medicine residency program. Residents were initially asked about their experiences with suboptimal medical decision making as a group or team. Then, questions were targeted to several group biases (groupthink, social loafing, escalation of commitment). Interviews were transcribed and transferred to a qualitative data analysis software. Thematic analysis was conducted to generate major themes within the dataset.

RESULTS

Sixteen interviews with residents revealed five major themes: (1) hierarchical influence on group decision making; (2) group decision making under pressure; (3) post-call challenges in decision making; (4) interactions between teamwork and decision making; and (5) personal and cultural influences in group decision making. Subthemes were also identified for each major theme. Most residents were able to recognize groupthink in their past experiences working with medical teams. Residents perceived social loafing or escalation of commitment as less relevant for medical team decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide unique insights into the complexities of group decision making processes in teaching hospitals. Team hierarchy significantly influenced residents' experiences with group decision making-most group decisions were attributed to consultants or senior team members, while lower ranking team members contributed less and perceived fewer opportunities to engage in group decisions. Other factors such as time constraints on decision making, perceived pressures from other staff members, and challenges associated with post-call days were identified as important barriers to optimal group decision making in patient care. Future studies may build upon these findings to enhance our understanding of medical team decision making and develop strategies to improve group decisions, ultimately leading to higher quality patient care and training.

摘要

背景

群体决策中的系统性偏差(即群体偏差)可能导致决策不理想,并可能对患者造成伤害。目前尚不清楚患者护理中受损的群体决策如何影响医学培训。本研究旨在探讨住院医师在医疗决策中关于受损群体决策的经验和观点,以及群体偏差的作用。

方法

本研究采用定性方法,以社会建构主义认识论为基础进行主题分析。对一个内科住院医师培训项目中的住院医师进行了半结构化访谈。住院医师最初被问及他们作为一个团体或团队在医疗决策中经历的次优决策。然后,针对几种群体偏差(群体思维、社会懈怠、承诺升级)提出了问题。访谈记录被转录并转移到定性数据分析软件中。对数据集进行主题分析,生成主要主题。

结果

对 16 名住院医师的访谈揭示了五个主要主题:(1)等级制度对群体决策的影响;(2)有压力的群体决策;(3)决策后的电话挑战;(4)团队合作与决策之间的相互作用;(5)群体决策中的个人和文化影响。每个主要主题也都确定了子主题。大多数住院医师能够在过去与医疗团队合作的经历中识别出群体思维。住院医师认为社会懈怠或承诺升级对医疗团队决策的相关性较小。

结论

我们的研究结果为教学医院群体决策过程的复杂性提供了独特的见解。团队等级制度显著影响了住院医师对群体决策的体验——大多数群体决策归因于顾问或高级团队成员,而排名较低的团队成员贡献较少,认为参与群体决策的机会较少。还确定了其他因素,如决策时间限制、来自其他工作人员的压力以及与电话后日子相关的挑战,这些都是患者护理中实现最佳群体决策的重要障碍。未来的研究可以在此基础上进一步了解医疗团队决策,并制定策略来改善群体决策,最终提高患者护理和培训的质量。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

1
Automating hybrid collective intelligence in open-ended medical diagnostics.自动化开放式医疗诊断中的混合集体智能。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Aug 22;120(34):e2221473120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2221473120. Epub 2023 Aug 14.
2
Collective intelligence improves probabilistic diagnostic assessments.群体智能可提高概率诊断评估的准确性。
Diagnosis (Berl). 2023 Feb 20;10(2):158-163. doi: 10.1515/dx-2022-0090. eCollection 2023 May 1.
5
Beyond the Guise of Saturation: Rigor and Qualitative Interview Data.超越饱和度表象:严谨性与定性访谈数据
J Grad Med Educ. 2021 Oct;13(5):607-611. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-21-00752.1. Epub 2021 Oct 15.
6
Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131.定性数据分析的主题分析:AMEE 指南第 131 号。
Med Teach. 2020 Aug;42(8):846-854. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030. Epub 2020 May 1.
10
Culture and its influences on dental education.文化及其对牙科教育的影响。
Eur J Dent Educ. 2018 Feb;22(1):57-66. doi: 10.1111/eje.12244. Epub 2016 Nov 24.

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