Cognitive Process of Diagnostic Error in Emergency Physicians

Thinking Clinical Trial

— diagnosis  

Official title:

Cognitive Process of Diagnostic Error in Emergency Physicians

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04030975
• Other study ID #: CGH-P103018
• Secondary ID: CGH-P103018
• Status: Completed
• Start date: May 2014
• Est. completion date: November 2015

Study information

• Verified date: July 2019
• Source: Cathay General Hospital
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

Diagnostic error, Dual process model of reasoning) During the last decade, much emphasis has been placed on system solutions to patient safety problems. However, diagnostic error, despite being responsible for twice as many adverse events as medication error, has received little attention. The rate of diagnostic errors have been estimated to be between 0.6% to 12%.Some estimates are as high as 15%.The rate of negative outcome or adverse effects of diagnostic errors range from 6.9% to 17%. Most authors accept that the dual process model of reasoning explains how clinicians make diagnoses. The purpose of this study is to investigate why diagnostic errors occurred in the emergency departments (EDs).

Description:

Diagnostic error, Dual process model of reasoning) During the last decade, much emphasis has been placed on system solutions to patient safety problems. However, diagnostic error, despite being responsible for twice as many adverse events as medication error, has received little attention. The rate of diagnostic errors have been estimated to be between 0.6% to 12%.Some estimates are as high as 15%.The rate of negative outcome or adverse effects of diagnostic errors range from 6.9% to 17%. Most authors accept that the dual process model of reasoning explains how clinicians make diagnoses. The purpose of this study is to investigate why diagnostic errors occurred in the emergency departments (EDs). A qualitative study approach was used with in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with emergency physicians to investigate the cognitive diagnosis process. The study takes place in the EDs of three hospitals in Taiwan. We chose the participants using a purposive sampling technique to yield a sample that would be most likely contribute significant information on the diagnostic process. Sampling continued until novel information was no longer being gathered. All audiotapes were transcribed verbatim. The transcripts are analyzed by two of the investigators based on the ground theory. Once all relevant codes were identified, they were grouped together into meaningful categories. These categories were then grouped under appropriate themes, which were used to generate a theory of diagnostic errors.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 30
• Est. completion date: November 2015
• Est. primary completion date: November 2015
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 21 Years to 65 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• trained emergency physicians

Exclusion Criteria:

• refused interview

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Emergencies
• Thinking

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Taiwan	Cathay hospital	Taipei

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Cathay General Hospital	Cardinal Tien Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Taiwan, 

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	generate a theory of diagnostic errors		Dec., 2015