Identifying and prioritizing educational content from a malpractice claims database for clinical reasoning education in the vocational training of general practitioners
-
Published:2022-12-19
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1382-4996
-
Container-title:Advances in Health Sciences Education
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Adv in Health Sci Educ
Author:
van Sassen Charlotte G. M.ORCID, van den Berg Pieter J., Mamede SilviaORCID, Knol Lilian, Eikens-Jansen Manon P.ORCID, van den Broek Walter W.ORCID, Bindels Patrick J. E., Zwaan LauraORCID
Abstract
AbstractDiagnostic reasoning is an important topic in General Practitioners’ (GPs) vocational training. Interestingly, research has paid little attention to the content of the cases used in clinical reasoning education. Malpractice claims of diagnostic errors represent cases that impact patients and that reflect potential knowledge gaps and contextual factors. With this study, we aimed to identify and prioritize educational content from a malpractice claims database in order to improve clinical reasoning education in GP training. With input from various experts in clinical reasoning and diagnostic error, we defined five priority criteria that reflect educational relevance. Fifty unique medical conditions from a malpractice claims database were scored on those priority criteria by stakeholders in clinical reasoning education in 2021. Subsequently, we calculated the mean total priority score for each condition. Mean total priority score (min 5–max 25) for all fifty diagnoses was 17,11 with a range from 13,89 to 19,61. We identified and described the fifteen highest scoring diseases (with priority scores ranging from 18,17 to 19,61). The prioritized conditions involved complex common (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, renal insufficiency and cancer), complex rare (e.g., endocarditis, ectopic pregnancy, testicular torsion) and more straightforward common conditions (e.g., tendon rupture/injury, eye infection). The claim cases often demonstrated atypical presentations or complex contextual factors. Including those malpractice cases in GP vocational training could enrich the illness scripts of diseases that are at high risk of errors, which may reduce diagnostic error and related patient harm.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Education,General Medicine
Reference39 articles.
1. Chamberland, M., Mamede, S., St-Onge, C., Setrakian, J., Bergeron, L., & Schmidt, H. (2015). Self-explanation in learning clinical reasoning: The added value of examples and prompts. Medical Education, 49(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12623 2. Chamberland, M., St-Onge, C., Setrakian, J., Lanthier, L., Bergeron, L., Bourget, A., et al. (2011). The influence of medical students’ self-explanations on diagnostic performance: Influence of self-explanations on diagnostic performance. Medical Education, 45(7), 688–695. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.03933.x 3. Charlin, B., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Custers, E. J., & Feltovich, P. J. (2007). Scripts and clinical reasoning: Clinical expertise. Medical Education, 41(12), 1178–1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02924.x 4. Colaco, M., Heavner, M., Sunaryo, P., & Terlecki, R. (2015). Malpractice Litigation and Testicular Torsion: A Legal Database Review. The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 49(6), 849–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2015.06.052 5. Cooper, N., Bartlett, M., Gay, S., Hammond, A., Lillicrap, M., Matthan, J., et al. (2021). Consensus statement on the content of clinical reasoning curricula in undergraduate medical education. Medical Teacher, 43(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1842343
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|