Irvine Nicola, Van Der Meer Robert, Megiddo Itamar
Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland.
Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 22;20(1):e0311748. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311748. eCollection 2025.
To conceptualise the cognitive processes of early expert decision-making in urgent care.
Expert clinicians in the UK frequently determine suitable urgent care patient pathways via telephone triage. This strategy is promoted by policymakers but how it is performed, and its effectiveness has not been evaluated. Evaluation of early senior decision-making requires knowledge of decision-processes, influences, and goals. Previous research has focused on diagnostic decision-making and rarely studied clinicians in the field.
We triangulated analytic autoethnography of early expert decision-making with focused ethnography of experts and trainee doctors performing the task. The study took place in a medium-sized Acute Medical Unit which provided internal medical emergency care for a mixed urban and rural population in the UK. A grounded theoretical model of expert decision-making was created via Gioia Methodology. Decision types were categorised to identify differences in solutions as well as decision processes.
The hallmarks of intuitive decision-making were found in most expert decisions. Experts made intuitive use of pattern-matching to extract key data from large volumes of information which triggered the spontaneous manifestation of solutions. Solutions were holistic and usually solitary. Upon manifestation solutions were consciously tested for viability with emotional affect playing a key role. Expert solutions were previously applied ones but were frequently entirely novel. Novel solution generation was not a feature of trainee decisions but moments of intuition were. Expert goals varied between optimal care for individual patients, system-wide efficiency, and equity of care. The decision environment had a large influence upon experts.
Expert clinicians employ intuitive decision-making supported by rational analysis in early urgent care decision-making. Expert solutions generated in this manner are pragmatic rather than optimal, context dependent, and seek to achieve goals which vary from moment-moment. Findings are crucial to inform research evaluating the effectiveness of early expert decision-making in urgent care as it is a high cost strategy. They also have implications for methodological approaches in future studies of expert clinical decision-making, developing artificial expert systems, and clinician training.
对紧急护理中早期专家决策的认知过程进行概念化。
英国的专家临床医生经常通过电话分诊来确定合适的紧急护理患者路径。这一策略得到了政策制定者的推广,但尚未对其实施方式及其有效性进行评估。对早期高级决策的评估需要了解决策过程、影响因素和目标。以往的研究主要集中在诊断决策上,很少对该领域的临床医生进行研究。
我们将早期专家决策的分析性自我民族志与执行该任务的专家和实习医生的聚焦民族志相结合。该研究在一个中型急性医疗单元进行,该单元为英国城乡混合人口提供内科急诊护理。通过乔亚方法创建了一个专家决策的扎根理论模型。对决策类型进行分类,以识别解决方案以及决策过程中的差异。
在大多数专家决策中都发现了直觉决策的特征。专家们直观地运用模式匹配从大量信息中提取关键数据,从而触发解决方案的自发显现。解决方案是整体性的,通常是单一的。解决方案显现后,会有意识地对其可行性进行检验,情感影响起着关键作用。专家的解决方案以前曾被应用过,但往往是全新的。新解决方案的产生不是实习医生决策的特点,但直觉时刻是有的。专家的目标在为个体患者提供最佳护理、全系统效率和护理公平性之间各不相同。决策环境对专家有很大影响。
专家临床医生在早期紧急护理决策中采用直觉决策,并辅以理性分析。以这种方式产生的专家解决方案是务实的,而非最优的,依赖于具体情境,并力求实现因时而异的目标。研究结果对于评估紧急护理中早期专家决策有效性的研究至关重要,因为这是一项成本高昂的策略。它们对未来专家临床决策研究的方法、开发人工专家系统和临床医生培训也有启示。