Suppr超能文献

探索心脏外科团队术中的认知偏差

Exploring Intraoperative Cognitive Biases in Cardiac Surgery Teams.

作者信息

Dias Roger D, Yule Steven J, Harari Ryan, Zenati Marco A

机构信息

STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA, USA.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Appl Hum Factors Ergon Conf. 2024;130:1-7. doi: 10.54941/ahfe1004831.

Abstract

This study focuses on understanding the influence of cognitive biases in the intra-operative decision-making process within cardiac surgery teams, recognizing the complexity and high-stakes nature of such environments. We aimed to investigate the perceived prevalence and impact of cognitive biases among cardiac surgery teams, and how these biases may affect intraoperative decisions and patient safety and outcomes. A mixed-methods approach was utilized, combining quantitative ratings across 32 different cognitive biases (0 to 100 visual analogue scale), regarding their "likelihood of occurring" and "potential for patient harm" during the intraoperative phase of cardiac surgery. Based on these ratings, we collected qualitative insights on the most-rated cognitive biases from semi-structured interviews with surgeons, anaesthesiologists, and perfusionists who work in a cardiac operating room. A total of 16 participants, including cardiac surgery researchers and clinicians, took part in the study. We found a significant presence of cognitive biases, particularly confirmation bias and overconfidence, which influenced decision-making processes and had the potential for patient harm. Of 32 cognitive biases, 6 were rated above the 75th percentile for both criteria (potential for patient harm, likelihood of occurring). Our preliminary findings provide a first step toward a deeper understanding of the complex cognitive mechanisms that underlie clinical reasoning and decision-making in the operating room. Future studies should further explore this topic, especially the relationship between the occurrence of intraoperative cognitive biases and postoperative surgical outcomes. Additionally, the impact of metacognition strategies (e.g. debiasing training) on reducing the impact of cognitive bias and improving intraoperative performance should also be investigated.

摘要

本研究聚焦于了解认知偏差在心脏外科手术团队术中决策过程中的影响,认识到此类环境的复杂性和高风险性质。我们旨在调查心脏外科手术团队中认知偏差的感知发生率和影响,以及这些偏差如何可能影响术中决策、患者安全和手术结果。采用了混合方法,结合对32种不同认知偏差(0至100视觉模拟量表)在心脏手术术中阶段“发生可能性”和“对患者造成伤害的可能性”的定量评分。基于这些评分,我们从对在心脏手术室工作的外科医生、麻醉师和灌注师的半结构化访谈中收集了关于评分最高的认知偏差的定性见解。共有16名参与者,包括心脏外科研究人员和临床医生,参与了该研究。我们发现认知偏差显著存在,尤其是确认偏差和过度自信,它们影响了决策过程并有可能对患者造成伤害。在32种认知偏差中,有6种在两个标准(对患者造成伤害的可能性、发生可能性)上的评分均高于第75百分位数。我们的初步研究结果为更深入理解手术室临床推理和决策背后的复杂认知机制迈出了第一步。未来的研究应进一步探索这一主题,特别是术中认知偏差的发生与术后手术结果之间的关系。此外,还应研究元认知策略(如去偏训练)对减少认知偏差影响和改善术中表现的作用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3d12/11342855/582e2eb83576/nihms-2016243-f0001.jpg

相似文献

3
Cognitive biases in surgery: systematic review.外科手术中的认知偏差:系统评价
Br J Surg. 2023 May 16;110(6):645-654. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad004.
5
Cognitive Biases in Orthopaedic Surgery.骨科手术中的认知偏差。
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2021 Jul 15;29(14):624-633. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-00620.
7
Cognitive debiasing 1: origins of bias and theory of debiasing.认知去偏倚 1:偏倚的起源和去偏倚理论。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Oct;22 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):ii58-ii64. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001712. Epub 2013 Jul 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Consensus on Key Attributes of Cardiac Surgeons' Intraoperative Performance.心脏外科医生术中表现关键属性的共识
J Surg Educ. 2025 Sep;82(9):103582. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2025.103582. Epub 2025 Jun 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Cognitive biases in surgery: systematic review.外科手术中的认知偏差:系统评价
Br J Surg. 2023 May 16;110(6):645-654. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad004.
6
First Reported Use of Team Cognitive Workload for Root Cause Analysis in Cardiac Surgery.团队认知工作量首次用于心脏手术根本原因分析。
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 Autumn;31(3):394-396. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2018.12.003. Epub 2018 Dec 19.
9
Surgical never events and contributing human factors.手术严重不良事件及相关人为因素
Surgery. 2015 Aug;158(2):515-21. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.03.053. Epub 2015 May 29.
10
Role of cognition in generating and mitigating clinical errors.认知在临床错误的产生与缓解中的作用。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Jul;24(7):468-74. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003482. Epub 2015 May 2.

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