Cognitive bias during clinical decision‐making and its influence on patient outcomes in the emergency department: A scoping review

Author:

Jala Sheila12ORCID,Fry Margaret1ORCID,Elliott Rosalind134ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery University of Technology Sydney Sydney New South Wales Australia

2. Neurology Department Royal North Shore Hospital St Leonards New South Wales Australia

3. Nursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Nursing and Midwifery Directorate, Northern Sydney Local Health District Royal North Shore Hospital St Leonards New South Wales Australia

4. Department of Intensive Care Medicine Royal North Shore Hospital St Leonards New South Wales Australia

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAn integral part of clinical practice is decision‐making. Yet there is widespread acceptance that there is evidence of cognitive bias within clinical practice among nurses and physicians. However, how cognitive bias among emergency nurses and physicians' decision‐making influences patient outcomes remains unclear.AimThe aim of this review was to systematically synthesise research exploring the emergency nurses' and physicians' cognitive bias in decision‐making and its influence on patient outcomes.MethodsThis scoping review was guided by the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. The databases searched included CINAHL, MEDLINE, Web of Science and PubMed. No date limits were applied. The Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendation (PAGER) framework was used to guide the discussion.ResultsThe review included 18 articles, consisting of 10 primary studies (nine quantitative and one qualitative) and eight literature reviews. Of the 18 articles, nine investigated physicians, five articles examined nurses, and four both physicians and nurses with sample sizes ranging from 13 to 3547. Six primary studies were cross‐sectional and five used hypothetical scenarios, and one real‐world assessment. Three were experimental studies. Twenty‐nine cognitive biases were identified with Implicit bias (n = 12) most frequently explored, followed by outcome bias (n = 4). Results were inconclusive regarding the influence of biases on treatment decisions and patient outcomes.Four key themes were identified; (i) cognitive biases among emergency clinicians; (ii) measurement of cognitive bias; (iii) influence of cognitive bias on clinical decision‐making; and (iv) association between emergency clinicians' cognitive bias and patient outcomes.ConclusionsThis review identified that cognitive biases were present among emergency nurses and physicians during clinical decision‐making, but it remains unclear how cognitive bias influences patient outcomes. Further research examining emergency clinicians' cognitive bias is required.Relevance to Clinical PracticeAwareness of emergency clinicians' own cognitive biases may result to the provision of equity in care.No Patient or Public Contribution in this reviewWe intend to disseminate the results through publication in a peer‐reviewed journals and conference presentations.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Medicine,General Nursing

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3